Michigan v. Bryant

Summary

The Court held that the victim’s statements to police were non‑testimonial because the primary purpose of the interrogation was to obtain information to address an ongoing emergency, so their admission did not violate the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause. The judgment of the Michigan Supreme Court was vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The decision was accompanied by dissents by Justices Scalia and Ginsburg, who argued the statements were testimonial, and a concurrence by Justice Thomas.