Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) effectively and silently overruled Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) effectively and silently overruled Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123) and established, without saying so, that whether the Confrontation Clause bars admission of out-of-court non-testifying co-defendants against a defendant at trial depends so/e/y on whether the out-of-court statements were “testimonial?” 2. Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that out-of-court statements by nontestifying co-defendants to an informant working in tandem with the police in real time with the primary purpose on their part to obtain incriminating evidence of a past crime for future prosecutions was not “testimonial,” and therefore admissible against the defendant at trial, because the police successfully fooled the declarants—and only the declarants—into believing that their conversation was a casual conversation in a (deliberately) informal setting among friends? ii