Autopsy reports inadmissible in health fraud case 
Published: January 23, 2012
Tags: Bullcoming v. New Mexico, Confrontation Clause, Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts
The testimony of the medical examiners who authored autopsy reports was required for the documents to be admitted as evidence in the criminal trial of a doctor who allegedly over-prescribed pain killers, the 11th Circuit has ruled in reversing a conviction.
Does Confrontation Clause bar expert DNA testimony?
By:
Kimberly Atkins
Published: December 6, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, criminal, DNA evidence, Melendez-Diaz, Supreme Court
WASHINGTON – The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have already looked at the issue of DNA evidence in criminal cases, with several rulings restricting prosecutors’ ability to admit such data without calling the lab analysts who prepared the tests to testify.
Tuesday, the Court took another look at the issue – this time considering whether expert testimony based in part on DNA database matches is constitutionally barred.
Recording of 911 call admissible in murder trial
Published: September 27, 2011
Tags: 911 call, Confrontation Clause, Crawford v. Washington
A murder defendant’s constitutional rights were not violated by the admission of the recording of a 911 call made by an unidentified woman who reported his flight from the crime scene, Maryland’s highest court has ruled in affirming a conviction.
Confrontation Clause ruling isn’t retroactive
Published: July 29, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, Melendez-Diaz, retroactivity
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring criminal lab report analysts to be available for cross-examination does not apply to a defendant who sought a new trial for a drug conviction that predated that decision, Massachusetts’ highest court has ruled in affirming judgment.
Ruling gives muscle to Confrontation Clause
By:
Kimberly Atkins
Published: July 11, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, criminal, DUI, lab tests, Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Confrontation Clause bars admission of laboratory reports such as blood-alcohol content tests through the in-court testimony of an analyst who did not personally perform the test was viewed as a major victory by some defense attorneys.
CONFRONTATION CLAUSE
Published: June 28, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, Crawford v. Washington, DNA, expert witness
Were a rape defendant’s Confrontation Clause rights violated when an expert witness for the state was permitted to render an opinion based on the results of a DNA analysis performed by a private laboratory?
Justices take up Confrontation Clause violation in rape case
Published: June 28, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, Crawford v. Washington, DNA, expert witness
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether a rape defendant’s Confrontation Clause rights were violated when an expert witness for the state was permitted to render an opinion based on the results of a DNA analysis performed by a private laboratory.
Justices: Substitute analysts cannot introduce lab tests
Published: June 23, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, evidence, Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, Supreme Court
The Confrontation Clause does not permit laboratory test reports to be introduced through the in-court testimony of an analyst who did not personally perform or observe the performance of the test, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled.
CONFRONTATION CLAUSE
Published: June 23, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause, evidence, Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, Supreme Court
The Confrontation Clause does not permit laboratory test reports to be introduced through the in-court testimony of an analyst who did not personally perform or observe the performance of the test.
See “Justices: Substitute analysts cannot introduce lab tests”
U.S. Supreme Court. Bullcoming v. New Mexico, No.
» Continue Reading.
Officers’ testimony violated defendant’s confrontation rights
Published: June 15, 2011
Tags: Confrontation Clause
Allowing two officers to summarize at trial the statements made by a witness to a murder when the witness was unavailable for trial violated the defendant’s constitutional right to confrontation, the 9th Circuit has ruled.
SUBSCRIBERS: Did you receive the new Lawyers USA Weekly Update in your inbox on Monday?
If not, click here to register and learn more now.
