Informant statements at trial
Martez Deangelo Wright v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Martez Deangelo Wright asked the Supreme Court to review whether prosecutors violated his right to question witnesses against him by playing a cooperating informant’s out-of-court statements to the jury without calling the informant to testify.
- Who it affects
- The denial ended Wright’s Supreme Court case but did not decide whether prosecutors violated his right to question the informant.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court refused to hear his case (denied review), so it did not decide whether a violation occurred.
The case came to the Supreme Court from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Question presented
Whether a violation of the Confrontation Clause occurred when prosecutors played out-of-court statements by a cooperating informant for a jury without calling the informant as a witness?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.