Opinion ID: 2582433
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: proximity of the perpetrator to the declarant

Text: ¶ 54 The Davis Court suggested the presence or absence of the perpetrator at the scene may indicate whether an emergency is ongoing and, by extension, whether a victim's statements are testimonial. Proximity or presence is a more nuanced consideration than simply whether the perpetrator is located at the same address as the declarant. The fact that both Hammon and the declarant in Crawford were actively separated from the defendant during their interrogations played a significant role in the Court's determinations that both interrogations yielded testimonial responses. Id. at 2278. The Court emphasized the significance of the proximity of the perpetrator at the time a particular statement was made while explaining that interrogations, which initially elicit nontestimonial responses, may evolve into conversations yielding testimonial statements. As the Court observed in Davis: after the operator gained the information needed to address the exigency of the moment, the emergency appears to have ended ( when Davis drove away from the premises ). The operator then told McCottry to be quiet, and proceeded to pose a battery of questions. It could readily be maintained that, from that point on, McCottry's statements were testimonial. Id. at 2277 (emphasis added).