Steptoe Files Amicus Brief in Important Supreme Court Victory

The Supreme Court handed down an important decision yesterday for domestic violence prosecutions in the cases of Davis v. Washington and Hammon v. Indiana, in which Steptoe attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief. The issue presented to the Court was whether the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment bars the admission into evidence of testimony provided by domestic violence victims to police, when the victims later refuse to testify at trial.

The Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment bars admission solely of "testimonial statements," i.e., statements given in non-emergency circumstances to police primarily to support a criminal prosecution. Statements given to police where the primary purpose is to secure police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency would be "non-testimonial" and admissible.

Applying this test to the two consolidated cases, the Court held that admission of an affidavit given by a domestic violence victim would ordinarily be testimonial, and inadmissible, while a tape of a 911 call would be non-testimonial and admissible.

The Court left open the possibility that the affidavit could be admitted, however, if the state proved that the victim’s absence at trial was the result of the defendant’s intimidation or coercion, resulting in "forfeiture" of his Sixth Amendment Rights. The ruling on the 911 tape and the forfeiture analysis was an important victory for domestic violence victims.

Toni Ianniello, Michael Rips, Amy Lester, and Kelly Wessels filed an amicus brief on behalf of over 50 non-profit organizations devoted to remedying domestic violence. Significantly, the Court adopted some of the policy arguments contained in Steptoe’s brief, and our suggestions concerning the proper application of the forfeiture rules.