Hemphill v. New York | Case No. 20-637 | Date Argued: 10/5/2021 | Date Decided: 1/20/2022

Background: A litigant's argumentation or introduction of evidence at trial is often deemed to "open the door" to the admission of responsive evidence that would otherwise be barred by the rules of evidence. In People v. Reid, the New York Court of Appeals announced an "open door" rule of constitutional dimension, separate and apart from the traditional evidentiary rule. Under this rule, a criminal defendant who, in the court's view, "opened the door" to responsive evidence, may thereby forfeit hearsay and Confrontation Clause objections that would otherwise preclude admission of the responsive evidence. The New York court has applied that rule even where it rests on an accused's truthful trial arguments or evidence; the accused has not engaged in a course of conduct suggesting that the right to object to responsive evidence would be abused; nor, indeed, the accused has done anything that could be construed as a knowing waiver of constitutional protections.

Question Presented: Whether, or under what circumstances, a criminal defendant who opens the door to responsive evidence also forfeits his right to exclude evidence otherwise barred by the Confrontation Clause.

Holding: The trial court’s admission of the transcript of Morris’ plea allocution over Hemphill’s objection violated Hemphill’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.

Result: Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED.

Voting Breakdown: 8-1. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Breyer, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett joined. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Kavanaugh joined. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.

Link to Opinion: Here.

Oral Advocates:

For Petitioner: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. For Respondent: Gina Mignola, Assistant District Attorney, Bronx, N.Y.