October Term 2005 · Docket 05-5705

Does a domestic violence victim's statement to police count as testimony?

The case tests whether statements made to officers at a crime scene qualify as testimonial evidence under the Confrontation Clause.

Official caption
Hammon v. Indiana
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

    Richard Friedman argued for Hammon. He said her statements were accusatory. He claimed they satisfied the definition of testimony.

    Michael Fisher argued for Indiana. He said the statements were emergency reports. He compared them to 911 calls.

    Justice Alito questioned the nature of 911 calls. He asked if they are always testimonial.

    Justice Breyer challenged the state's broad definition. He worried it excludes too much evidence.

    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

Amy Hammon told police officers about a domestic violence incident. Indiana prosecutors used her statements at trial. She argues these statements were testimonial. The state argues they were emergency reports. The Court must define the line between these two types of statements.

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

Hammon wants the Court to rule that her statements were testimonial. She wants the state to exclude them from evidence.

Indiana wants the Court to rule that her statements were non-testimonial. It wants to admit them as evidence.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Hammon argues her statements were made to build a case. She claims this makes them testimonial under the Constitution.

Indiana argues her statements were made to address an emergency. It claims this makes them non-testimonial.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Alito asked if a 911 call describing a hit-and-run is testimonial.

Justice Breyer asked if the state's rule excludes statements far removed from prosecution.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines what counts as testimony. It affects how police handle domestic violence calls. It shapes the rights of victims and defendants in court.

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