Opinion ID: 2206409
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: Objective Manifestations vs. Subjective Intent

Text: However, even in this context we believe Davis can offer some guidance. There, the Court did not look to the actual subjective intent of the police officer conducting the interrogation leading to the statements in question. Rather, the Court clearly stated that the proper inquiry is what the circumstances objectively indicate the purpose of the interrogation to be. Davis, 547 U.S. at ___, 126 S.Ct. at 2273-74, 165 L.Ed.2d at 237. There is no reason to believe that the applicability of the confrontation clause would depend on objective manifestations of intent when the statement is the product of police interrogation but would depend on actual subjective intent outside of this context. Accordingly, in our view, the proper question is not whether the declarant actually did intend or foresee that his statement would be used in prosecution. Rather, the question is whether the objective circumstances indicate that a reasonable person in the declarant's position would have anticipated that his statement likely would be used in prosecution. See Cromer, 389 F.3d at 675; Friedman, 71 Brook. L.Rev. at 252.