Ohio v. Roberts

At Roberts's (defendant's) preliminary hearing on forgery and stolen-property charges, the alleged victims' daughter, Anita, testified and denied giving Roberts permission to use her parents' checks and cards; Roberts's counsel cross-examined her at that hearing. Anita could not be located for trial despite a subpoena, and the prosecution introduced a transcript of her preliminary-hearing testimony over Roberts's Confrontation Clause objection; the trial court admitted it and convicted Roberts, but the Ohio Supreme Court reversed, finding a Confrontation Clause violation, and the prosecution appealed.