No. 21-39
Benjamin Ramirez Ruiz v. California
Response Waived
Tags: child-protective-services confrontation-clause crawford-v-washington criminal-procedure evidence-law ongoing-emergency sixth-amendment testimonial-evidence testimonial-statement
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (from Petition)
Was a statement made to a child protective services investigator testimonial for the purposes of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause as established in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S. Ct. 1354, 158 L. Ed. 2d 177 (2003), at least when the statement was made in the presence of, and recorded by, a police officer and there was no ongoing emergency?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was a statement made to a child protective services investigator testimonial for the purposes of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-07-21
Waiver of right of respondent People of the State of California to respond filed.
2021-06-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 11, 2021)
Attorneys
Benjamin Ramirez Ruiz
Paul Gilruth McCarthy — Law Offices of Beles & Beles, Petitioner
People of the State of California
Seth Kasel Schalit — Attorney General's Office, Respondent