A child was killed by a stray bullet after a street fight, and Darrell Hemphill was convicted after the prosecution introduced evidence connected to another suspect’s earlier plea. Hemphill argued that using that evidence violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. The Supreme Court held that the state court had applied the wrong constitutional framework when it admitted the evidence and that the error required a new analysis. It reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion. A dissent disagreed with the Court’s treatment of the evidence and would have left the state-court judgment in place.