Abstract
In the 1980 case of State v. Anderson,1 the Utah Supreme Court declared that the admission of hearsay evidence at a preliminary hearing, over the objection of a criminal defendant, violated the defendant's right of confrontation under the Utah Constitution. This ruling has evoked a controversy between the state supreme court and the legislature and has significantly affected criminal law practice in Utah. This Comment questions the validity of Anderson and concludes that the Anderson ruling should probably be reversed because it is inconsistent with the prevailing weight of authority, ignores legislative intent and places a significant burden on local government resources.
Recommended Citation
Allred, Mark L.
(1986)
"Confrontation Rights and Preliminary Hearings,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1986:
No.
1, Article 3.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1986/iss1/3