The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: Except for Point III, each claim lacks merit. As to Point III, we conclude that the hearsay admission of the "Uniform Certification for Bodily Specimens Taken in a Medically Acceptable Manner," (certification) without...
Criminal Law
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 12)
The next important case to address Confrontation Clause issues was the 2007 New Jersey Appellate Division case of State v. Renshaw. There, a three-judge panel wrote in relevant part: Defendant Robert Renshaw appeals from a conviction for driving while intoxicated, in...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 11)
Justice Scalia concluded with the following in relevant part: Amy Hammon’s statements were testimonial. They were not much different from those in Crawford. It is clear from the circumstances that Amy’s interrogation was part of an investigation into possibly criminal...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 10)
The Court continued in relevant part: McCottry’s statements identifying Davis as her assailant were not testimonial. This case requires the Court to decide whether the Confrontation Clause applies only to testimonial hearsay, and, if so, whether the 911 recording...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 9)
Justice Scalia also wrote for an 8-1 majority of the United States Supreme Court in Davis v. Washington, a 2006 case that addressed the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. He held in relevant part: In No. 05–5224, a 911 operator ascertained from Michelle McCottry...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 8)
The Court concluded with the following in relevant part: Second, the Framers would not have allowed admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 7)
Justice Scalia also authored the United States Supreme Court Confrontation Clause opinion for the seven-justice majority in Crawford v. Washington. Two justices filed an opinion concurring in the judgment but differing in their analysis. Justice Scalia wrote in...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 6)
Justice Scalia concluded with the following in relevant part: The arguments advanced to avoid this rather straightforward application of Crawford are rejected. Respondent's claim that the analysts are not subject to confrontation because they are not "accusatory"...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 5)
Another seminal case dealing with the Confrontation Clause is Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts. There, Justice Scalia wrote for the 5-4 majority in relevant part: At petitioner's state-court drug trial, the prosecution introduced certificates of state laboratory...
Confrontation Clause Cases (Part 4)
Justice Ginsburg continued in relevant part: The comparative reliability of an analyst's testimonial report does not dispense with the Clause. The analysts who write reports introduced as evidence must be made available for confrontation even if they have “the...