McCrary v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed McCrary’s convictions, holding that admission of the child victim’s recorded statements did not violate the Confrontation Clause because she appeared at trial, took the stand, and was available for cross-examination despite her memory loss. The Court also held that the State satisfied the foundational requirements for admitting another child’s recorded statement under 11 Del. C. § 3507 and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. Because neither challenged ruling constituted error, there was no cumulative error.