1903

Maybe, but probably not.

The argument for the prosecution is that a 911 call is not testimonial. It has no trappings of formality and has been made to get help and at best to assist a police investigation, not to assist the prosecution in bringing charges. There is no evidence the speaker intended to make an evidentiary statement.

The defense can argue that the definition of “testimony” includes not just an accusation, but also a description of the crime, and this is a description of the crime made partly to assist the police.

I think most judges would admit most 9-1-1 calls.

Questions? Email tanford@indiana.edu and refer to 1903

Drug sale case. A witness looks out the window and says, "There's Joe and Bubba sitting in the car. I wonder what they're doing." Turns out they were selling drugs. The statement is a present sense impression. Is it admissible or is it barred by Crawford? When you think you know the answer, click here .