[DV_listserv] Caselaw

[Domestic Violence issues]

PROSECUTORS: I've had a couple questions recently about what qualifies
under Crawford as "available" when a victim has a "loss of memory" on
the stand or "refuses" to testify about the incident. I sent Appellate
an email and these are the cases they referenced which should be helpful
to you if this issue comes up in trial. 
 
I got a message from a DDA in Multnomah County who was recently
successful (Defendant is currently serving TEN years in prison after she
convicted him) at trial using these cases. 
 
(I would also urge you to look at the discussion in Kirkpatricks,
pages705-707.)
 
 
(From Jennifer Lloyd:) The case that I always cite is State v. Sullivan,
217 Or App 208 (2007) (fact that cross-examination was not effective
does not mean that defendant lacked that opportunity; victim's lack of
memory did not mean that defendant was denied opportunity for
cross-examination).  There's also (slightly more recently) State v.
Bumgarner, 219 Or App 617 (2008) (holding the same thing).  
 
I
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/dv_listserv/attachments/20110107/f4226393/attachment.html>