That’s the title given by the Los Angeles Daily Journal to my article, which it published in its November 19, 2007 issue, regarding U.S. v. Larson, the en banc Ninth Circuit’s confusing “resolution” of the perceived split of authority on the standard of review in Confrontation Clause challenges based on limitations on cross-examination. The article (PDF link) grew out of this blog post giving my initial impressions about the case on the day it was published. I followed up that post with another providing links to some other blog coverage of the case.
- Appellate Procedure, Articles by Greg May, Confrontation Clause, Constitutional Law, Criminal Procedure, Federal Procedure, Standard of Review
-
Welcome to all Los Angeles Daily Journal Readers — and a Happy Thanksgiving to All
Welcome to all those visiting this blog for the first time after reading my article in the November 21 Los Angeles Daily Journal! Click and scroll around, check out some of the links in the blogroll, and come back again. Better yet, subscribe to this blog’s RSS feed. My regular readers of more than a few months’ duration have seen my posts about the subject of that article — last August’s en banc decision in U.S. v. Larson, in which the Ninth Circuit resolved a 3-way intra-circuit split on the standard of review for Confrontation Clause challenges based on limits placed on cross-examination — here and here. The article in…
-
More on U.S. v. Larson
A few days ago, I blogged about the odd reasoning behind the en banc Ninth Circuit’s purported resolution in United States v. Larson of a 3-way intra-circuit split over the applicable standard of review in Confrontation Clause cases. Here’s some other blog coverage. While my post concentrated on the intra-circuit split, Split Circuits gives you coverage of the split among the federal circuits on the same issue. California Appellate Report comments on the odd 4-4-7 split vote of the en banc panel that results in one of the 4-judge opinions being the opinion of the court. Larson is Ninth Circuit Blog’s Case o’ the Week, where the federal defenders’ blog…