The nation�s criminal courts may have been flustered by the U.S. Supreme Court�s June ruling casting doubt on judicial sentencing, but judges across the country had already been struggling to cope with an earlier decision barring certain hearsay evidence. In fact, criminal law experts are calling Crawford v. Washington, No. 02-9410, decided in March, one of the most significant rulings of the last quarter-century.
As of this summer, courts cited Crawford in more than 200 written decisions. Many lawyers think the case will come into play in virtually every trial of a criminal case. And, they say, it�s already changed how judges analyze whether to admit hearsay evidence. . . .
[C]rawford held that �testimonial� evidence must be subjected to cross-examination for it to be admitted against criminal defendants. Specifically, wrote Justice Antonin Scalia for a 7-2 majority, the Sixth Amendment�s confrontation clause requires that defendants be allowed to examine testimony against them.
Details here from the ABA Journal.