Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

22 Wash. 2d 552

157 P.2d 320

State v. Ortego

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 8, 1945

Washington Supreme Court · decided 1945-03-08

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The exceptions are not even static, but may be enlarged from time to time if there is no material departure from the reason of the general rule.”

quoted by 5 later decisions, including Kreck v. Spalding, 25 Wash. App. 568 - State v. Dault

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1945-03-08

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Bryant v. State (1991), 73 Wash. 2d 616 - State v. Martin (1968)

5 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

7019451950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Millard, J.

¶1 (dissenting) — I dissent. I cannot concur in any opinion which deprives an accused of the right to meet the witnesses against him, face to face. The right of confrontation is the right of having the witness face to face with the accused in the tribunal having jurisdiction to permit the privilege of cross-examination — in the tribunal which determines defendant’s guilt or innocence of the crime charged. The gradual deprivation of the accused *565 in criminal cases of constitutional rights, courts may not justify by thinly spun exceptions.

¶2 It has well been said that the right of confrontation is not granted by the Federal and state constitutions, but is a right secured by those constitutions.

¶3 Mere words, such as the following language from 14 Am. Jur. 891, do not warrant judicial repeal of this valuable right:

“The constitutional guaranty carries with it the exceptions to the common-law principle which it embodies. It has even been suggested that the exceptions are not static, but may be enlarged from time to time if there is no material departure from the reason of the general rule.”

¶4 Blake, J., concurs with Millard, J.

/22/wash2d/552 · .json · Public domain