Analysis Of The Supreme Court Case Of Bryant V. Michigan

According to a portion of the Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights, the accused has the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. Otherwise meaning, any and all witnesses must be present for the trial to be considered fair and just. In the Supreme Court Case of Bryant v. Michigan, Bryant committed a crime, with the only witness being Anthony Covington. Bryant uses the Sixth Amendment as an aid in his trial.
On April 29, 2001, in Detroit, Michigan, police were immediately called to the scene of a shooting. Found by the police on the ground of a gas station parking lot, Anthony Covington had suffered a shot to the abdomen. When asked the standard questions such as, who, what, and when, Covington responded, “Rick.” After being shot through a door at Rick Bryant’s house, Covington drove to the nearest gas station and called 911. The questioning occurred for about five minutes until emergency medical services arrived to assist Covington. Later, he died. The police then drove to Bryant’s house to question

After compelling testimonies, Bryant received the charges of second-degree murder, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Bryant then appealed his conviction four times, and the fourth time being appealed to the Supreme Court of Michigan, the court allowed his case reopened. During his appeal, Bryant stated that Covington’s allegations were hearsay, and their inability to cross-examine Covington, under the Sixth Amendment, carry through as inadmissible in court. Upon the Supreme Court’s decision, Bryant was issued to appear for a new trial, without Covington’s statement to the police. Bryant won his second trial, and reversed his second-degree murder charge, and the possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony charge