John Paul Stevens

“ Williams, in the class of rape cases in which the victim and the defendant have had a prior sexual relationship, evidence of this relationship may be relevant when the defendant raises the defense of consent. The Court of Appeals reasoned that in such a situation, the in camera hearing does not play a useful role; rather, it is likely to become a contest of the victim's word against the defendant's word, with the judge reaching his decision based upon his assessment of the credibility of each, and that decision is better left to the jury. ”

“ The reasons for restricting the use of the exclusion sanction to only the most extreme situations are even more compelling in the case of criminal defendants, where due process requires that a defendant be permitted to offer testimony of witnesses in his defense. ”

“ Because I am convinced that the Court of Appeals correctly held that this unique Michigan statute is unconstitutional, I would affirm its judgment.
Notes ↑ The Court of Appeals does rely on People v. Williams, 95 Mich.App. 1, 289 N.W.2d 863 (1980) , rev'd on other grounds, 416 Mich. 25, 330 N.W.2d 823 (1982) , and in that case, the Court of Appeals does refer to the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation and cross-examination. 95 Mich.App., at 5, 289 N.W.2d, at 864. The Sixth Amendment provides in relevant part: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . ”