« Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 4 today (and 13 NFP) | Main | Ind. Courts - Brinkman will serve as pro temp of the Madison Circuit Court [Updated] »

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decides Pendergrass v. State

In Richard Pendergrass v. State of Indiana, an 18-page 3-2 opinion, Chief Justice Shepard writes:

Richard Pendergrass was convicted of two counts of child molesting based in part on DNA evidence showing he was very likely the father of the victim‘s aborted fetus. The State‘s witnesses to this effect were a laboratory supervisor with direct knowledge of the processing of the samples and an expert DNA analyst who used the laboratory‘s print-outs to render an opinion. Pendergrass contends his rights under the Confrontation Clause were violated because the State did not present the technician who ran the samples through the laboratory‘s equipment. We conclude that the proof submitted was consistent with the Sixth Amendment as recently detailed in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts. * * *

Dickson and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
Rucker, J., dissents with separate opinion in which Boehm, J., concurs. [J. Rucker's dissent, which on p.11, concludes] In sum, despite whatever ambiguity Melendez-Diaz may have created on the question of who must testify at trial, it appears to me the opinion is clear enough that a defendant has a constitutional right to confront at the very least the analyst that actually conducts the tests. "A witness‘s testimony against a defendant is thus inadmissible unless the witness appears at trial or, if the witness is unavailable, the defendant had a prior opportunity for cross-examination." Id. at 2531 (citing Crawford, 541 U.S. at 54). Because Ms. Powers did not appear at trial, and because there was no evidence of her unavailability or a prior opportunity for Pendergrass to cross-examine her, the trial court erred by admitting into evidence Ms. Powers‘ testimony by way of the Certificate of Analysis and Profiles for Paternity Analysis. I therefore respectfully dissent on this issue.

The ILB has had a number of entires on the Pendergrass / Melendez-Diaz issue.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 24, 2009 03:50 PM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions