Under which condition is a prior testimonial statement by an unavailable witness admissible?

A prior testimonial statement from an unavailable witness is admissible under the condition that the witness was cross-examined when the statement was made. This aligns with the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which is designed to ensure that a defendant has the right to confront witnesses against them. However, if the witness is unavailable, the previous statements may still be admissible, provided that the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness at the time the statement was made. This approach maintains the fairness of the judicial process by ensuring that prior statements bear sufficient reliability because they were subjected to the rigors of cross-examination when they were originally given.

In contrast, being present during a statement does not guarantee its admissibility if there was no opportunity for cross-examination. The mere fact that a statement is written also does not inherently make it admissible; it must meet the legal standards of reliability and opportunity for challenge. Additionally, while a defendant's admission to a statement may have implications in some contexts, it does not automatically qualify the statement for admissibility under the rules governing hearsay and prior testimony. Thus, the critical factor relates to the prior opportunity for cross-examination of the witness.