Pennsylvania v. Ritchie

Summary

The Court held that it had jurisdiction despite further proceedings remaining in state court and that due process entitled Ritchie to judicial review of confidential child-abuse records for material favorable evidence, but not to inspection of the entire file by defense counsel. It affirmed the remand requirement, reversed the requirement of defense access, and remanded for in camera review. Powell's four-Justice plurality, joined by Rehnquist, White, and O'Connor, additionally concluded that withholding the records did not violate the Confrontation Clause because cross-examination at trial was unrestricted. Blackmun joined the Court's other holdings and judgment but wrote separately that pretrial withholding could implicate confrontation rights; he considered judicial review adequate to address those concerns. Brennan, joined by Marshall, dissented, arguing that denial of access to the victim's prior statements violated the Confrontation Clause, and also joined Stevens's jurisdictional dissent. Stevens, joined by Brennan, Marshall, and Scalia, would dismiss the writ because the state judgment was not final.