Criminal Procedure — right to cross-examine

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — right to cross-examine

A defendant must show that he was prejudiced by admission of testimony in violation of his right to cross examine.

“Doyle argues that his inability to question Dr. Dutra about the notes and cross-outs on the findings form denied him a substantial right—i.e., the right to confront a witness bearing testimony against him. The issue we face is whether the admission of the findings form without cross-examination of its author affected Doyle’s substantial rights. And to convince us, Doyle must demonstrate that, but for the Confrontation- Clause error, the outcome of the trial probably would have been different. United States v. Prude, 489 F.3d 873, 880 (7th Cir. 2007). Doyle provides no evidence, much less an argument, to make that showing; instead he relies simply on a Crawford violation to prove that his substantial rights were affected. But the mere presence of a Crawford violation does not mean that the outcome of the trial probably would have been different; indeed, we find that, in this case, the error had no effect on the outcome.”

Affirmed.

11-3077 U.S. v. Doyle

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Herndon, J., Bauer, J.