A couple interesting opinions from the NY Court of Appeals (highest court) that do the job in about ten pages total.
The first underlines how a right to confront one's accusers pursuant to the Sixth Amendment (and the state equivalent, here assumed to be equal) involves witnesses, not those whose "excited utterances" arose from police questioning at the scene to determine what happened. Here, the woman was assaulted, he asked what happened, and from this the guilty party was determined. The victim could not appear, would be interesting to know why but apparently not relevant to the case, so the officer's testimony alone was submitted.
The second involved a claimed "ineffective assistance" case, underlined the state rule is somewhat more protective, but the pro se claim here was deemed too weak (one claim was wrong, the other not backed up with sworn testimony).