Last year, in the fairly blockbuster case of Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court resurrected the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, wiping away decades of shady evidence slipping into criminal prosecutions without any cross-examination. Confrontation was required, said the Court, where "testimonial" evidence is at issue. What's testimonial evidence, you ask? Well, the Supremes didn't really tell us. As a result, lower federal and state courts have been split on the issue, particularly when it comes to statements made at the scene of events to police officers or in 911 calls. Thankfully, the Court has taken two cases to resolve the issue next spring. One is from Washington, in which the defendant is represented by the same guy who brought us Crawford in the first place (in addition to Blakely). The second case, from Indiana, is being pushed by a law prof from Michigan. You can access the briefs filed to this point at his Confrontation Blog here.