Maryland v. Craig
Significance, Court Overrides Plain Language Of The Sixth Amendment, Further Readings
State of Maryland
Sandra Ann Craig
That allowing an alleged victim of child abuse to testify by closed circuit television violates the Sixth Amendment right of criminal defendants to confront their accusers in court.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
J. Joseph Curran, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
William H. Murphy, Jr.
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor (writing for the Court), William H. Rehnquist, Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
27 June 1990
The Supreme Court found that because the closed circuit procedure did not rule out cross-examination, it satisfied the essential purpose of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.
- Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012 (1988).
- Idaho v. Wright, 497 U.S. 805 (1990).
- Massachusetts v. Oakes - Significance, Overbroad Or Not?, Creating A "chilling Effect", Dissension In The Court, Further Readings
- Martin v. Wilks - Significance, Reverse Discrimination, Further Readings
- Maryland v. Craig - Further Readings
- Maryland v. Craig - Significance
- Maryland v. Craig - Court Overrides Plain Language Of The Sixth Amendment
- Other Free Encyclopedias