Skip to content
Name: Jensen v. Pliler
Case #: 04-55840
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 03/09/2006

The confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment does not bar admission of hearsay statements that a deceased declarant made to his attorney. After a federal district court denied his petition for writ of habeas corpus, the defendant argued in the Ninth Circuit that his Sixth Amendment rights were violated at his California murder trial when an attorney was permitted to testify as to statements made by a former client while the former client was in jail. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that the statements were not testimonial under Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36. The court declined to reach the issue of whether the admission of non-testimonial statements is still governed by Ohio v. Roberts (1980) 448 U.S. 56, noting that even assuming that Roberts is still the governing standard, the California Court of Appeal decision affirming the conviction was not contrary to and did not involve an unreasonable application of the law of the United States Supreme Court as set forth in Roberts.