October Term 2005 · Docket 05-5224

Does a 911 call for help count as testimony?

The dispute centers on whether a victim's 911 call seeking aid counts as formal testimony under the Confrontation Clause.

Official caption
Davis v. Washington
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the side that brought the case's advocate stated the caller knowingly told a government agent about a crime. This makes the statements testimonial.

    the opposing side's advocate stated the operator asked questions to respond to an emergency. This makes the statements non-testimonial.

    Justice Ginsburg noted the call was initiated by the victim. She described it as a cry for help.

    Justice Roberts asked about a scenario where a victim yells at a neighbor. This tests the scope of the emergency exception.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the boundary between emergency calls and formal testimony. The Confrontation Clause limits the use of out-of-court statements. The core issue is whether a 911 call seeking help qualifies as testimonial evidence.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 20, 2006.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the court to declare the 911 statements testimonial. This would exclude the statements from evidence at trial.

the opposing side wants the court to declare the 911 statements non-testimonial. This would allow the statements as evidence at trial.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues the caller knowingly reported a crime to a government agent. This makes the statements testimonial under the Confrontation Clause.

the opposing side argues the operator asked questions to address an emergency. This makes the statements non-testimonial and admissible.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked what the caller wanted if not help. This probes the intent behind the 911 call.

Justice Breyer asked how the Confrontation Clause differs from hearsay rules. This seeks a clear legal distinction between the two concepts.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines when emergency calls become formal testimony. It affects how courts treat victim statements in domestic violence cases. The outcome shapes the balance between public safety and defendant rights.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON