Sixth Amendment Confrontation Waivers Are Still Effective

A defense counsel's waiver of a Sixth Amendment-based confrontation challenges to evidence are effective even when trial judges don't personally address the defendants.

 

United States v. Ceballos, 2015 BL 191201, 5th Cir., No. 13-50786

 

 

     The US Supreme Court, in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), replaced the confrontation test for hearsay that it had adopted in the 1980s and gave new standards that are very protective of defendant's rights to cross-examine. A rule that resulted from this was that defendants waive their confrontation challenges to certain evidence when they fail to object to their attorney's decisions regarding evidence stipulations.

 

     The court here determined that, because of the defendant's attorney's waiver, the defendant's claim was unreviewable. She was not entitled to even a plain error review of her confrontation challenge to hearsay. The court also indicated that the Tenth Circuit, in United States v. Lopez-Medina, 596 F.3d 716 (10th Cir. 2010), specifically addressed the issue and also held that Crawford "did not change the contours of confrontation-waiver law."