SCOTUS: Mississippi statute mandating screening child witness from defendant violates right to confrontation.
Jeffrey Clyde Pitts v. Mississippi, USSC No. 24-1159, 11/24/2025; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS reverses conviction for child abuse because Mississippi law that requires screening at trial for child witnesses conflicted with the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee to face-to-face confrontation.
At Jeffrey Pitts’ Mississippi trial for sexually abusing his four-year-old daughter, the State moved for permission to place a screen between the child and Pitts when she testified. A Mississippi statute provides that child witnesses “shall” have the right to a screen that permits the judge and jury to see the child but obscures the child from the defendant. Pitts objected, but the trial court granted the State’s motion because the statute was mandatory. Pitts was convicted and the judgment was affirmed by the Mississippi Supreme Court.
Pitts sought certiorari in SCOTUS, which reversed the judgment of the Mississippi Supreme Court affirming his conviction in a per curiam opinion. Citing its decisions in Coy and Craig, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment prohibits a trial court from denying the defendant the right to confront his accuser “face to face simply because a state statute permits screening.” (slip op. at p. 3). Rather, screening in child-abuse cases is permitted only if the trial court hears evidence and issues a case-specific finding of necessity. (p. 3). Here, the State “expressly rejected the notion that it had to put on any proof” and relied on the Mississippi statute’s mandatory screening requirement, while the trial court also considered the statute mandatory. (p. 5). Because the Mississippi statute’s mandatory effect conflicted with the Sixth Amendment, Pitts was entitled to relief.