Does Co-Defendant's Confession Violate Confrontation Clause ?
In Richardson v. Marsh (1987) 481 U.S. 200 [107 S. Ct. 1702, 95 L. Ed. 2d 176], the United States Supreme Court limited Bruton v. United States (1968), holding that the confrontation clause is not violated by the admission of a codefendant's confession that has been redacted "to eliminate not only the defendant's name, but any reference to his or her existence," even if the confession incriminates defendant when considered in conjunction with other evidence. (481 U.S. at p. 211 [107 S. Ct. at p. 1709].)
While Bruton required that the admission be "powerfully" incriminating, Richardson required that it also be "incriminating on its face . . . ." (481 U.S. at p. 208 [107 S. Ct. at pp. 1707-1708].)
The confession in Richardson was not incriminating on its face, but only became so when linked with evidence introduced later at trial.