Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-637_10n2.pdf
Page Number: 5.0

2 

HEMPHILL v. NEW YORK 

Opinion of the Court 

People v. Reid, 19 N. Y. 3d 382, 388, 971 N. E. 2d 353, 357 
(2012).

The question is whether the admission of the plea allocu-
tion  under  New  York’s  rule  in  People  v.  Reid  violated 
Hemphill’s  Sixth  Amendment  right  to  confront  the  wit-
nesses against him.  The Court holds that it did.  Hemphill
did not forfeit his confrontation right merely by making the
plea allocution arguably relevant to his theory of defense. 

I 
A 
In April 2006, Ronnell Gilliam and several other individ-
uals got into a physical fight near Tremont Avenue in the 
Bronx.  Shortly after the fight, someone fired a 9-millimeter 
handgun.  The  bullet killed  a  2-year-old  child  sitting  in  a
nearby minivan.

Police officers determined that Gilliam was involved and 
that Nicholas Morris, Gilliam’s best friend, had been at the 
scene.  Officers  searched  Morris’  apartment.   On  Morris’ 
nightstand, the officers found a 9-millimeter cartridge and 
three .357-caliber bullets.  Three witnesses identified Mor-
ris as the shooter out of a police lineup. 

The  police  arrested  Morris  the  next  day  and  observed
bruising  on  his  knuckles  consistent  with  fist  fighting.
Gilliam  then  surrendered  and  identified  Morris  as  the 
shooter.  Gilliam later returned to the police station and re-
canted, stating that Hemphill, Gilliam’s cousin, had in fact 
been  the  shooter. 
Investigators  initially  did  not  credit
Gilliam’s  recantation;  instead,  the  State  charged  Morris 
with the child’s murder and for possession of a 9-millimeter
handgun.  After opening statements at Morris’ 2008 trial,
however, the State decided not to oppose Morris’ application 
for a mistrial to allow the State to reconsider the charges 
against him.

Approximately  six  weeks  later,  the  State  agreed  to  dis-
miss the murder charges against Morris if he pleaded guilty