Ohio v. Clark

Ohio v. Clark
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 2, 2015 Decided June 18, 2015
Full case name	Ohio v. Darius Clark
Citations	576 U.S. ___ (more) 137 Ohio St. 3d 346, 2013–Ohio–4731, 999 N. E. 2d 592
Prior history	Defendant convicted; reversed, No. 96207, 2011 WL 6780456(Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2011); reversed, 999 N.E.2d 592 (Ohio 2013); rehearing denied, 999 N.E.2d 698 (Ohio 2013); certiorari granted, 575 U.S. ___ (2015)
Subsequent history	None
Holding
The use at trial of out of court statements made by a child did not violate the Confrontation Clause, when the child did not testify, because the statements were not made with the primary purpose of creating evidence.
Court membership
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Alito, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
Concurrence	Scalia, joined by Ginsburg
Concurrence	Thomas
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. VI

Ohio v. Darius Clark, 576 U.S. ___ (2015), is United States Supreme Court case opinion that narrowed the standard set in Crawford v. Washington for determining whether hearsay statements in criminal cases are permitted under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Supreme Court of Ohio on June 18, 2015. The court held that the out-of-court statements were admissible because the primary purpose was not to create evidence.

External links

• PDF Decision of Court