Opinion ID: 2097750
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Indiana Confrontation Clause

Text: Criminal defendants in this state have an independent right of confrontation arising from article 1, section 13, of the Indiana Constitution. It provides: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right ... to meet the witnesses face to face... . Like its federal counterpart, the Indiana confrontation clause reveals little about its framers' intent. The clause in its present form was part of Indiana's 1816 constitution. During the constitutional convention of 1850, the right to jury trial and the requirement of grand jury indictment sparked some debate and led to amendments. However, the substance of the right to confront witnesses face to face was never discussed. See generally, Debates of Indiana Convention, 1850. Indiana courts have seldom been called upon to define the parameters of the state provision. Before Pointer established the applicability of the Sixth Amendment confrontation right to the states in 1965, confrontation questions were rarely raised on appeal in this state. Since Pointer, defendants in Indiana have presented their confrontation claims either solely on Sixth Amendment grounds or on both federal and state grounds. With few exceptions, Indiana appellate courts have analyzed these confrontation questions with reference to federal case law and treated the state provision as providing guarantees similar to its federal counterpart. For instance, in Lagenour v. State (1978), 268 Ind. 441, 376 N.E.2d 475, this Court held that the right to confront witnesses granted by both the federal and state constitutions includes the right to full, adequate and effective cross-examination and declared this right fundamental and essential to a fair trial. In Marjason v. State (1947), 225 Ind. 652, 654, 75 N.E.2d 904, 905, we ruled, with regard to the Indiana right of confrontation: Meeting the witnesses face to face must also include the right to cross-examine. While the Indiana courts have relied on Ohio v. Roberts in reviewing both state and federal confrontation claims, this action does not preclude us from forming an independent standard for analyzing claims under the Indiana confrontation clause. [2] References to federal authority notwithstanding, Indiana courts have clearly determined that cross-examination is the primary interest secured by the confrontation right in article 1, section 13 of the Indiana Constitution.