This amicus brief was written in response to Defendant’s claim that preventing him from cross-examining a child plaintiff violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause. Includes issue of whether a pro se child abuser has a rigid right to direct examination of his child victim. The final opinion is State ex. rel. Montgomery v. Padilla, 371 P.3d 642 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE re. M.A. v. THE HONORABLE JOSE PADILLA, ET. AL.
March 17, 2016
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Case No. 15-1049