No. 20-921
Braulio Marcelo Castillo v. Virginia
Response Waived
Tags: child-witness closed-circuit-testimony confrontation-clause crawford-precedent crawford-v-washington criminal-trial due-process maryland-v-craig sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-02-19
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Does the Confrontation Clause allow a non-victim child witness to testify against his father via two-way closed-circuit television when the witness cannot see his father and does not know that his father is on trial for murder?
2. Given that Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), removed the underpinnings of Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990), should Craig be overruled?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the Confrontation Clause allow a non-victim child witness to testify against his father via two-way closed-circuit television when the witness cannot see his father and does not know that his father is on trial for murder?
Docket Entries
2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-01-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2021-01-19
Waiver of right of respondent Virginia to respond filed.
2021-01-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 8, 2021)
Attorneys
Braulio M. Castillo
Joseph Douglas King — King, Campbell, Poretz PLLC, Petitioner
Virginia
Toby Jay Heytens — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent