« Ind. Courts - Injunction against Governor not needed after all, but interesting | Main | Ind. Law - More on new laws taking effect July 1 »
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Courts - "Is Melendez-Diaz already endangered?"
Monday the SCOTUS has decided the case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (07-591), on whether a state forensic analyst’s laboratory report prepared for use in a criminal prosecution is “testimonial” evidence. As noted in this June 24th ILB entry, at least two Indiana cases argued before our Supreme Court in 2008 have probably been awaiting this ruling.
Also on Monday, Lyle Denniston of the SCOTUSLaw Blog had an interesting analysis piece headed "Is Melendez-Diaz already endangered?" Just a few quotes:
The ruling, made under the Constitution’s Confrontation Clause, requires the prosecution, if it plans to present a lab report as evidence in a criminal trial, to make the analyst who prepared it available for on-demand cross-examination by defense counsel. The decision came on a 5-4 vote.If it were possible to pick up a fifth vote, could the dissenters from that case then lead the Court to reconsider — or least narrow considerably – the decision in Melendez-Diaz? * * *
This is speculation, of course, but there is little else to suggest why the Court announced Monday that, next Term, it will review the case of Briscoe, et al., v. Virginia (07-11191). Here is the question raised in the Briscoe petition, filed in May of last year by University of Michigan law professor Richard D. Friedman:
“If a state allows a prosecutor to introduce a certificate of a forensic laboratory analysis, without presenting the testimony of the analyst who prepared the certificate, does the state avoid violating the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment by providing that the accused has a right to call the analyst as his own witness?”
Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 1, 2009 09:44 AM
Posted to Courts in general