Does a defendant have a right to cross-examine an out-of-court confession made by a non-testifying codefendant?

^7. There was a special rule for out-of-court statements by a non-testifying codefendant. In Bruton v. United States (1968) 391 U.S. 123 [20 L.Ed.2d 476], the United States Supreme Court held that the introduction of a confession of a defendant that implicates a codefendant violates the codefendant's constitutional right of cross-examination even if the jury is instructed to disregard the confession in determining the codefendant's guilt or innocence. (Id. at p. 137 [20 L.Ed.2d at p. 485].) The court recognized that "where the powerfully incriminating extrajudicial statements of a codefendant, who stands accused side-by-side with the defendant, are deliberately spread before the jury in a joint trial," that "the risk that the jury will not, or cannot, follow instructions is so great, and the consequences of failure so vital to the defendant, that the practical and human limitations of the jury system cannot be ignored." (Id. at pp. 135-136 [20 L.Ed.2d at pp. 484-485].)