Legal Document

129 S. Ct. 2527 (2009) Luis E. MELENDEZ-DIAZ, Petitioner, v. MASSACHUSETTS. No. 07-591. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 10, 2008. Decided June 25, 2009. *2530 Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, CA, for Petitioner. Martha Coakley, Attorney General, Boston, MA, Respondent. Lisa H. Schertler, States as amicus curiae, by special leave the Court, supporting Mary T. Rogers, Salem, Thomas C. Goldstein, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld LLP, Washington, DC, Pamela Karlan, Amy Howe, Kevin K. Russell, Howe P.C., Bethesda, Md, James J. Arguin, David Friedman, Assistant Attorneys Justice SCALIA delivered opinion Court. The Massachusetts courts in this case admitted into evidence affidavits reporting results forensic analysis which showed that material seized police and connected to defendant was cocaine. question presented is whether those are "testimonial," rendering affiants "witnesses" subject defendant's right confrontation under Sixth Amendment. I In 2001, Boston officers received a tip Kmart employee, Wright, engaging suspicious activity. informant reported Wright repeatedly phone calls at work, after each he would be picked up front store blue sedan, return short time later. set surveillance parking lot witnessed precise sequence events. When got out car upon his return, one detained searched him, finding four clear white plastic bags containing substance resembling officer then signaled other on scene arrest two men carone whom petitioner Melendez-Diaz. placed all three cruiser. During drive station, observed their passengers fidgeting making furtive movements back car. After depositing they cruiser found bag 19 smaller hidden partition between seats. They submitted state laboratory required law conduct chemical request. Mass. Gen. Laws, ch. 111, § 12 (West 2006). Melendez-Diaz charged with distributing cocaine trafficking an amount 14 28 grams. Ch. 94C, §§ 32A, 32E(b)(1). At trial, prosecution *2531 from It also "certificates analysis" showing performed substances. certificates weight stated "[h]a[ve] been examined following results: contain: Cocaine." App. Pet. Cert. 24a, 26a, 28a. were sworn before notary public analysts State Laboratory Institute Department Public Health, law. 13. Petitioner objected admission certificates, asserting our Confrontation Clause decision Crawford 541 U.S. 36, 124 1354, 158 Ed. 2d 177 (2004), testify person. objection overruled, pursuant "prima facie composition, quality, net narcotic ... analyzed." jury guilty. He appealed, contending, among things, violated Amendment confronted witnesses against him. Appeals rejected claim, affirmance order, 69 Mass.App.Ct. 1114, 870 N.E.2d 676, 2007 WL 2189152, *4, n. 3 (July 31, 2007), relying Judicial Court's Commonwealth Verde, 444 279, 283-285, 827 701, 705-706 (2005), held authors not denied review. 449 1113, 874 407 (2007). We granted certiorari. 552 ___, 128 1647, 170 352 (2008). II Constitution, made applicable via Fourteenth Amendment, Pointer Texas, 380 400, 403, 85 1065, 13 923 (1965), provides "[i]n criminal prosecutions, accused shall enjoy him." Crawford, reviewing Clause's historical underpinnings, we it guarantees confront "who `bear testimony'" U.S., 51, 1354. A witness's testimony thus inadmissible unless witness appears trial or, if unavailable, had prior opportunity cross-examination. Id., 54, Our described class testimonial statements covered follows: "Various formulations core exist: ex parte in-court or its functional equivalentthat is, such affidavits, custodial examinations, unable cross-examine, similar pretrial declarants reasonably expect used prosecutorially; extrajudicial contained formalized materials, depositions, testimony, confessions; circumstances lead objective believe statement available use later trial." 51-52, 1354 (internal quotation marks citations omitted). *2532 There little doubt documents issue fall within "core statements" described. description category mentions twice. See White Illinois, 502 346, 365, 112 736, 116 848 (1992) (THOMAS, J., concurring part judgment) ("[T]he implicated only insofar confessions"). here, while denominated "certificates," quite plainly affidavits: "declaration[s] facts written down declarant authorized administer oaths." Black's Law Dictionary 62 (8th ed.2004). incontrovertibly "`solemn declaration affirmation purpose establishing proving some fact.'" supra, (quoting 2 N. Webster, An American English Language (1828)). fact possession codefendants was, claimed, cocainethe expected provide called trial. "certificates" functionally identical live, doing "precisely what does direct examination." Davis 547 813, 830, 126 2266, 165 224 (2006) (emphasis deleted). Here, moreover, "`made trial,'" 52, but sole weight" analyzed substance, can safely assume aware affidavits' evidentiary purpose, since purposeas relevant state-law provisionwas reprinted themselves. 25a, 27a, 29a. short, analysts' statements, purposes Absent unavailable cross-examine them, entitled "`be with'" 1354.[1] III Respondent dissent advance potpourri analytic arguments effort *2533 avoid rather straightforward application holding Crawford. Before addressing however, must assure reader falsity dissent's opening alarum "sweep[ing] away accepted rule governing scientific evidence" has "established least 90 years" "extends across 35 six Federal Courts Appeals." Post, 2543 (opinion KENNEDY, J.). vast majority state-court cases cites support claim come last years, 30, surprisingly nearly them rely Ohio Roberts, 448 56, 100 2531, 65 597 (1980), since-rejected theory unconfronted admissible long bore indicia reliability, id., 66, 2531. post, 2559.[2] As cited dissent, five postdated expressly relied Roberts. 2554-2555. sixth predated Roberts entirely same erroneous theory. Kay States, 255 F.2d 476, 480-481 (C.A.4 1958) (rejecting clause challenge "where there reasonable necessity [the evidence] where qualities reliability trustworthiness"). review predate era yields mixed picture. notes, supreme court decisions early 20th century respect regarding substance's alcohol content. 2554 (citing Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia). But reached opposite conclusion. Torres State, 113 Tex. Crim. 1, 18 S.W.2d 179, 180 (App.1929); Volrich 278, 1925 2473 (Ohio App., Nov. 2, 1925). much clear: faithfully applying case, overruling years settled jurisprudence. seeks overturn precedent resurrecting mere turn now various legal raised respondent dissent. first argues because "accusatory" witnesses, do directly accuse wrongdoing; rather, inculpatory when taken together linking contraband. Brief 10. This finds no text "to (Emphasis added.) To extent (a resolved above), certainly provided petitioner, necessary convictionthat possessed contrast adjacent Compulsory Process *2534 confirms analysis. While "against him," call "in favor." Const., Amdt. 6. contemplates classes witnessesthose favor. produce former;[3] may latter. Contrary respondent's assertion, third helpful prosecution, somehow immune confrontation. often, indeed perhaps usually, adverse alone, will suffice convict. Yet fails cite single absent cross-examine.[4] Unsurprisingly, contrary longstanding Kirby 174 47, 574, 43 890 (1899), considered Kirby's conviction receiving stolen property, consisted, part, records individuals who guilty stealing property. 53, 574. Though proved property stolen, it, nevertheless ruled rights Clause. 55, King Turner, 1 Mood. 347, 168 Eng. Rep. 1298 (1832) (confession having certain goods could another property). B argue should "conventional" (or "typical" "ordinary") sort whose most notoriously Sir Walter Raleigh. 2550-2551; 28. true, recognized examinations Raleigh's have "long thought paradigmatic violation." identifies confrontation, limits. invented response Case, How. St. Tr. (1603). That provoked outcry precisely flouted deeply rooted common-law tradition "of live adversarial testing." 43, W. Blackstone, Commentaries Laws England 373-374 *2535 (1768)). 43-47, any purported distinctions identify accusers survive scrutiny. contends "conventional recalls events past, analyst's report contains near-contemporaneous observations test." 2551-2552. doubtful reports characterized "near-contemporaneous observations"; completed almost week tests performed. 24a-29a (the 28, December 4, 2001). regardless, misunderstands role "near-contemporaneity" played notes factor given "substantial Davis, 2551, disproves position. admissibility responding domestic disturbance. By arrived assault ended, victim's statementswritten oralwere sufficiently close alleged her affidavit "present sense impression." 820, 2266 "near-contemporaneous" she reported, witness. 2266. second reason witnesses" (and confrontation) "observe[d] neither crime nor human action related it." 2552. authority particular limitation type Nor conceivable fit outside scope For example, officer's investigative describing examine officer? novel exception coverage exempt expert witnessesa hardly "unconventional" witnesses. asserts interrogation. Ibid. 29. explained, "[t]he Framers more willing cross-examination volunteered answers open-ended questions than detailed interrogation." 822-823, authority, none, person volunteers less "`witness against' defendant," 26, event, 12-13. If request "write happened" suffices trigger Amendment's protection (as apparently does, see 819-820, 2266; 840, 5, judgment dissenting part)), well. *2536 C claims difference, purposes, recounting events, "prone distortion manipulation," "resul[t] neutral, Relatedly, value "one professional feel differently about test look defendant." 31 omitted); 2548-2549. argument invitation overruled 597, "particularized trustworthiness" notwithstanding What said remains true: "To sure, ultimate goal ensure evidence, procedural substantive guarantee. commands, reliable, assessed manner: testing crucible Dispensing obviously reliable akin dispensing prescribes." 61-62, waysand better waysto verify test.[5] Constitution way: license suspend preferable strategy available. evident "neutral testing" neutral suggests. Forensic uniquely risk manipulation. According recent study conducted auspices National Academy Sciences, [laboratories producing administered enforcement agencies, departments, administrator head agency." Research Council Academies, Strengthening Science States: Path Forward 6-1 (Prepublication Copy Feb. 2009) (hereinafter Report). And "[b]ecause scientists often driven work need answer issues sometimes face pressure sacrifice appropriate methodology sake expediency." S-17. analyst official pressureor incentiveto alter manner favorable prosecution. means assuring accurate honest forced defendant, 2548, cannot fraudulent analyst. Innocence Network Amicus Curiae 15-17 *2537 (discussing documented "drylabbing" never performed); Report 1-8 1-10 fraud error involving evidence). Like eyewitness fabricated account police, false may, oath open court, reconsider testimony. Coy Iowa, 487 1012, 1019, 108 2798, 101 857 (1988). And, course, prospect deter place. designed weed analyst, incompetent Serious deficiencies trials. One commentator community concedes, varying degrees urgency, system produces convictions based discredited forensics." Metzger, Cheating 59 Vand. L.Rev. 475, 491 (2006). exonerating resulted overturning concluded invalid contributed 60% cases. Garrett Neufeld, Invalid Testimony Wrongful Convictions, 95 Va. (2009). concluded: "The science system, encompassing both research practice, serious problems addressed national commitment overhaul current structure supports country." P-1 original).[6] generally, lack proper training deficiency disclosed illustrative. bare-bones did know performed, routine, interpreting exercise skills possessed. still analysts, told laboratories "methodology recommended Scientific Working Group Analysis Seized Drugs," 1a-2a. requires presents might explored P. Giannelli Imwinkelried, Evidence 23.03[c], pp. 532-533, 23A, p. 607 (4th ed.2007) (identifying "critical errors" commit commonly gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis); Shellow, Application Daubert Identification Drugs, Shepard's Expert Quarterly 593, 600 (1995) (noting spectrometers *2538 equipped computerized matching systems, "forensic typically utilize feature instrument, exclusively subjective judgment"). true many types prosecutions. "[T]here wide variability disciplines regard techniques, methodologies, numbers potential errors, research, general acceptability, published material." S-5. 5-9, 5-12, 5-17, 5-21 subjectivity, bias, unreliability common latent fingerprint analysis, pattern/impression toolmark firearms analysis). suggestion, useless honesty, proficiency, methodologythe features focus experts. D without "akin business law." 35. qualify traditional records, even did, nonetheless. Documents kept regular course ordinarily despite hearsay status. Fed. Rule Evid. 803(6). regularly activity production Palmer Hoffman, 318 109, 63 477, 87 645 (1943), distinction clear. accident employee railroad company record because, although railroad's operations, "calculated essentially business." 114, 477.[7] certificateslike generated officialsdo reason. 803(8) (defining "excluding, matters personnel"). rebut noting coroner's inquest previously noted, whatever status England, accorded practice. 1354; Giles California, 554 2678, 2705-06, 171 488 (2008) (BREYER, dissenting); EvidenceOfficial RecordsCoroner's Inquest, U. Pa. 290 (1917). which, though prepared traditionally admissible: clerk's certificate authenticating recordor copy thereoffor evidence. 2552-2553. *2539 narrowly circumscribed. permitted certify correctness office," "no furnish, lawsuit, interpretation shows, effect." Wilson, 141 La. 404, 409, 75 So. 95, 97 Champion, N.C. 987, 21 S.E. 700, 700-701 (1895); 5 Wigmore, 1678 (3d ed.1940). suggests "`narrowly circumscribed'" makes difference. 2553. contrary, difference world. shows line narrow able simultaneously vindicates present case. clerk authenticate otherwise record, here: create providing defendant.[8] Far probative here sought admit attesting failed find it. serve guilt depended nonexistence searched. Although definitionit dutiesand witness" approach, nonetheless People Bromwich, 200 N.Y. 385, 388-389, 93 N.E. 933, 934 (1911); Goodrode, 132 Mich. 542, 547, 94 N.W. 14, 16 (1903); 1678.[9] relationship business-and-official-records exceptions Crawford: "Most nature testimonialfor furtherance conspiracy." Business generally rules, becausehaving created administration entity's affairs *2540 trialthey testimonial. Whether hereprepared specifically petitioner's trialwere E violation ability subpoena analysts. powerwhether Clauseis substitute Unlike Clause, provisions simply refuses appear. See, e.g., ("[The witness] subpoenaed, appear trial"). Converting prosecution's duty privilege shifts consequences adverse-witness no-shows accused. More fundamentally, imposes burden bring court. Its replaced waits chooses. F Finally, asks us relax requirements accommodate "`necessities adversary process.'" 59. whence derive so. make criminals burdensome, equally self-incrimination. Clauselike constitutional provisionsis binding, disregard convenience. accuracy dire predictions. respondent, amici highlight substantial total number controlled-substance analyses federal years. small fraction actually proceed Professors Amici 7-8 (nearly 95% obtained plea).[10] Perhaps best indication sky today's done so already. Many already adopted announce today,[11] others *2541 permit assert forfeit silence) notice intent report, 13-15 (cataloging laws). Despite these widespread practices, justice ground halt that, way another, empower insist appearance Indeed, itself, 57, yet obstructionist defendants abusing privilege. "far reassuring promised." 2557. doubts rest flawed premises. First, believes statutes "requiring give analyst," "burden-shifting [that] invalidated reasoning." 2554, 2557-2558. simplest form, notice-and-demand require period object Ga.Code Ann. 35-3-154.1 (2006); Tex.Code Proc. Ann., Art. 38.41, 4 (Vernon 2005); Rev. Code 2925.51(C) perception, shift whatever. always raising objection; govern free adopt rules objections. Wainwright Sykes, 433 72, 86-87, 2497, 53 594 (1977). announcing Rules 12.1(a), (e), 16(b)(1)(C); Comment: Alibi Notice Rules: Preclusion Sanction Procedural Default, 51 Chi. 254, 254-255, 281-285 (1984) cataloguing notice-of-alibi rules); Taylor 484 411, 646, 98 798 (1988); Williams Florida, 399 78, 81-82, 1893, 26 446 (1970). why similarly compelled Hinojos-Mendoza People, 169 P.3d 662, 670 (Colo.2007) approving Colorado's provision). Today's disrupt prosecutions large practice accord Clause.[12] *2542 Second, several "independently... matter 2558. assessing likely practical effects ruling, irrelevant rule; recent, predictions accurate, drug level, immediate dramatic results. absence telling. surprising. Defense attorneys clients stipulate ordinary unlikely defense counsel effect merely cast want antagonize judge wasting intend fashion.[13] brief filed District Support "it [analysts' certificates] objection. Generally, benefit testimony." SJC-09320 (Mass.), 7 (footnote Given strategic considerations, light experience protections defendants, today commence parade horribles predict. * involves 177. prove out-of-court error.[14] therefore reverse remand further proceedings inconsistent opinion. ordered. *2543 THOMAS, concurring. write separately note continue adhere my position "the confessions." judgment); 2693, (concurring opinion) (characterizing include "sufficiently formal resemble Marian examinations" Mirandized "accompanied [a] formality" omitted)); 836, part) (reiterating encompasses materials listed White, 736. join "are affidavits," ante, 2532. such, "fall governed THE CHIEF JUSTICE, BREYER, ALITO join, dissenting. sweeps Until today, introduced "analyst" produced established extends Appeals. undoes opinions say nothing analysts: remarkable confidently disregards learn misinterpreted Clause arcane seldom-used provision Constitutionfor 218 existence. systemic concern attempt acknowledge real differences perform other, conventional witnesses"witnesses" being word dealt witnesseswomen seen, victim of, question. Those stand proposition witnessone personal knowledge aspect guiltmay appearing meet face. sayindeed, said, Courtthat anyone has, fact, guilt. Because concerned typical sensible thing limited defined. THOMAS warned approach *2544 become "disconnected history unnecessary prevent abuse." 838, reliance "testimonial" help, dictates law, as-yet-undefined kinds bear onerous Then, guidance assured f[ell] firmly exception," bar admission. (1980) (overruled Crawford). Now, body guess future distill sparse text. Mendez, Washington: Critique, 57 Stan. 569, 586-593 (2004) unanswered statements). formalistic wooden divorced precedent, sense, underlying ruling procedures ample misuse reasons, fully explained below, elicits respectful says "analyst." Ante, 2531-2532. term, nowhere elaborated definition define term. Consider how people play routine presence illegal drugs. prepares sample drug, places machine, retrieves machine's printoutoften, graph frequencies radiation absorbed masses sample's molecular fragments. 23.03 (describing methods identifying drugs, including infrared spectrophotometry, nuclear magnetic resonance, chromatography, mass spectrometry). interprets machine prints out comparing printout published, standardized graphs known Meanwhile, person independent contractorhas calibrated and, so, certified good working order. fourth personperhaps laboratory's director certifies subordinates followed procedures. persons announces today. forbidden discussed requiring threatens end *2545 newly formalism holds sway. Part I-C, infra. possible read opinion, testify. Each test's result respects, representation test. Person represents pure sample, properly drawn, entered printout. Two corresponds drug. Three time. Four jobs power introduce error. technician adulterate sample. contractor botch calibration. forth. reasons errors range animus suspect suspects unintentional oversight; gross negligence good-faith mistake. surprise plausible deeming process machine. unmistakable, result's depends calibration, turn, contractor's certification job properly. definition: formal, statement, offered truth asserted, clear, His supra. deliberately introduces error, interpretive step affect result. participant implies much. 2536-2537. consider director arguably effective revealing ambiguity findings, variations procedures, office, familiar standard office's variations, seek mean relies restates subordinates. offers principles determine All contribute remote scene, stake outcome, accused, performance conducting argued signed certificate. Under view, sign *2546 spare burden. arrangement. enter through second: "[W]e think readily evaded note-taking policeman [here, signs certificate] recite unsworn performs actual test], instead deposition. point caseEnglish American, federalcan cited, 826, logic, cabined certificates. signatory restating analysts whoever bethen too, demonstrates clarity is. Outside category, affected new staggering. Comment, Toward Definition "Testimonial": How Autopsy Reports Do Not Embody Qualities Testimonial Statement, 96 Cal. 1093, 1094, 1115 every post-Crawford autopsy testimonial, warning "effectively functio[n] statute limitations murder"). difficult confine damage contexts. just twoestablishing chain custody document. obligation establish sent laboratoriesthat identity integrity physical tracing continuous whereabouts." 23 C.J. S., Criminal 1142, 66 Meeting representationsthat retrieved checked locker, verified locker's seal intact, iron logic enamored seem link custody. That, Lott, 854 244, 250 (C.A.7 1988) ("[G]aps [of custody] normally go admissibility"); 29A Am.Jur.2d, 962, 269 ("The control fungible not, more, relating inadmissible"); C.J.S., 67 ("It handled testify"). "[i]t decide steps crucial evidence." 2532, 1. itself determines links crucialnot cases, excluded foundation. context cause disruption: *2547 long-accepted copies document's custodian stating accurate. 902(4) (in order self-authenticating, "certified correct custodian"); 902(11) (business custodian"). reading recordkeepers So far, impose largely meaningless requirement. Adefehinti, 510 F.3d 319, 327-328 (C.A.D.C.2008) (certificates bank confrontation); Ellis, 460 920, 927 2006) (certificate hospital records). breadth undefined scope, well deemed erred. consequence ought tell something very wrong history, predict applications holding. Surely justification lie predictability. predictable uncertainty disruption ensue. With guide us, let sense. designed, serve, detect tests. Or, impossible, own explain flaws dangers if, extraordinary defense, then, frets "when [analyst] appear." 2540. locate compel. devote considerable subpoenaed infra; Alabama et al. 26-28. Neither offer trouble subpoenaing necessary. illustrate pointless knew, him test, effort, during mount challenged tests' seeking discovery concerning qualifications 14(a)(2) 41. Again, test; indeed, Rather dispute authenticity samples tested *2548 shown results, pro forma admitting presumably Today deciding sustained, transforms system. perceive impress gravity conduct. 1019-1020, witness, brought words condemn, refine, reformulate, reconsider, recant earlier statements. ibid. alleviate danger one-sided interrogations government officials distort guards bringing interrogation forum courtroom. Maryland Craig, 497 869-870, 110 3157, 111 666 (1990) (SCALIA, dissenting) "value guarding child's distorted coerced recollections"); L.Rev., 1120-1122 ("During private law-enforcement questioning, prosecutors exert high discovered. Courtroom contrast, jury, defendant. Pressure harder court"). served retract conclusion catching sight condemns. all, far removed hundreds thousands year remember infallible. not. raw analysis; interpret particularly complex known; laboratory; proof. follows beyond doubt, presumptions, unreliable hearsay, like. Gypsum Co., 438 422, 446, 2864, (1978) (refusing "`conclusive presumption intent],'" "`would effectively eliminate ingredient offense'" Morissette 342 246, 274-275, 72 240, 288 (1952)). Holmes South Carolina, 331, 1727, 164 503 (affirming "have meaningful complete defense" omitted)). latitude witnesses; irrebutable presumptions; overriding principle *2549 doubtall determining addresses follow, clause, lieu forth above, controls issue. Suppose, instance, challenges secure lab returned police. show secure. demand chief, custodyand undoubted taint tamper evidencemust technicians. needed matters. Where, adds nothing. negligible benefits, investigations country put nationwide dismissal erratic, all-too-frequent instances technician, invested designation costs enjoys weeks, months, argued. receive briefs advance. busy attorneys' schedules juries. Trial huge caseloads processed strict Some unexpectedly plead minute; others, unexpectedly, juries stay longer predicted; reconstituted. hope court's top priority scheduling. waiting days hallway courtroom consist rote recital report. I-B, stood spent few unlike contested 26-28 (testifying takes time); 2542 (before "`almost [we]re objection'" courts). greater result, enormous justice. Setting aside, moment, crimes required, alone. 2004, data available, 362,850 felony country. Dept. Justice, Bureau Statistics, M. Durose Langan, Felony Sentences 2007). Roughly products plea *2550 bargains, saw 18,000 trials year. responsible drugs crushing district attorney Philadelphia prosecuted 25,000 2007. Dist. Association Assuming same, assuming bargain, city's ibid., next Cleveland's 14,000 holds, 6 (two time) 117 Government graver difficulties operations widespread. FBI Quantico, Virginia, federal, state, local 500 employees over million 2007, Message Director, http://www.fbi.gov/ hq/lab/lab2007/labannual07.pdf visited 22, 2009, Clerk file). reaches board plane, unfamiliar courthouse, sit aloud months ago. purchases meddling dear price, price measured taxpayer dollars Guilty free, technical grounds, decision, adding truth-finding process. courthouse ill; country; travel inclement weather; moment invents time, findings (unless, cross-examined analyst). proof, goes technicality acquittal, reviewed appeal. windfall unjustified demonstrated trials, well-understood requirement, precedent. decisionthe imprecise "analyst," perceptible benefit, heavy societal costswould fundamental mistake referring kind statementnamely, statementthat refer contain "testimonial." text, instead, refers persons, namely, "witnesses against" *2551 understood framing. proposition. Instead, "witness"meaning (that perceives) event gives Both witnessand justifies expand states: "In right... "virtually drafters intended mean," 359, judgment), contemplate conducts "witnes[s] perceived gave rise belief extend unconventional significant contrary. II-B, circumstances, "`too meager form solid basis preceding contemporaneous framing Constitution.'" Boumediene Bush, 553 2229, 2251, 41 Reid Covert, 354 64, 77 1222, 1148 (1957) (Frankfurter, result)). dangerously bases guesswork. infamous treason Raleigh excellent examples refers. (1603); 44-45, (Raleigh's informs understanding framing, "most notorious instances" abuse witnesses' statements); 2534 (same). claimed heard speak treason, limit like expands differ ways. observation recorded usual act testifying. recall previous once, misperceived misremembered. memory; made. consideration Davis. There, "primary purpose" 911 enable assistance ongoing emergency," past potentially prosecution." 822, 827, *2552 Geier, 4th 555, 605-609, 61 Rptr. 3d 580, 161 104, 139-141 "witness[ing]" observes Often, identity, distance space Third, responds 15-20. according protocols; dependent controlled sort. Put differently, "require by, involvement investigating prosecuting crime." 1118. herewho Institute, division Health petitioner. formulating assumes, extended statement. confident tone disguise thinness reeds. connection 826-830, (witnesses victims defendants' assaults); 38, (witness stab victim). employed term thereby suggested person, distant crime, suggestion adjective awkward phrasing reusing noun "witness." phrase sweeping rule, prosecutionno crimemust "witness justify expansive interpretation. No contradicts scientists, witnessthe copyist. copyist's essential analyst's. *2553 convict man bigamy, marriage records. 54 Ala. 131, 134, 135 (1875); Potter, 52 Vt. 33, 38 (1879). original archive, introducing honesty diligence important here. copyist falsifies copy, misspells name transposes date, diligence, certifying Such copy's accuracy), Framers' copyists' hesitation courts. Percheman, 85, 8 604 (1833) Marshall, J.); Advisory Committee's Note 902(4), U.S.C.App., 390 procedure certificate"); 1677, (J. Chadbourn rev.1974). civil Williams, supra; generation, attempts "narrowly circumscribed." 2539. matters, nor, matter, circumscribed" they, excused drawing fine squared avowed allegiance formalism. Determining witness' Crawford's framework. closer pre-Crawford "bears adequate reliability." 2531 keeping Dowdell 221 325, 590, 55 753 (1911), judge, reporter, certificate, met requirement rejecting executed "were accused" asked defendants'] innocence." 330, 590. recently reaffirmed Dowdell. 825, insisting author *2554 pain excluding violence sensible, limited, conception addition lacking extending Almost ago constitutions one, upheld liquid alcohol, Slavski, 245 405, 413, 140 465, 467 (1923). highest Connecticut Virginia conclusions constitutions. Torello, 103 Conn. 511, 131 A. 429 (1925); Bracey Commonwealth, 119 867, 89 144 (1916). Just constitution Clark, Mont. 479, 484-489, 964 P.2d 766, 770-772 (1998) (laboratory Montana's "[u]nlike counterpart"); Birchfield, Or. 624, 157 216 (2007), 631-632, P.3d, 220 (suggesting "typical requirement" lawful). stronger still: agreed. Sherman Scott, 136, 139-142 (C.A.5 1995); Minner Kerby, 30 1311, 1313-1315 (C.A.10 1994); Baker, 855 1353, 1359-1360 (C.A.8 1988); Reardon Manson, 806 39 (C.A.2 1986); 1958); Manocchio Moran, 919 770, 777-782 (C.A.1 1990) (autopsy death). 24 courts, Armed Forces, accord. Appendix A, (Some appendixes doctors, coroners, calibrators reasoning same.) Eleven burden-shifting reduce, eliminate, take affirmative summon reasoning, 11 decisions, III-B, Most remaining endorsing Against proffers intermediate appeals. 2533-2534. On States' this. sixteen calibration medical personnel B, rule. Garnett, 122 1016, 1018-1019 (C.A.11 1997) (per curiam); Gilbert, 774 965 *2555 (C.A.9 1985) Ware, 247 698, 699-700 1957); Oates, 560 45, 82 1977) (report public-records business-records rule). modern trend toward testimonyperhaps increasing testing. infra limiting precedents law). laws grounded legislatures had, until now, abrogate courts' outweigh benefits. strips carving minority view legislatures, Members shape errs great measure Sciences. 2536-2537 2009)). directed elected representatives Congress who, competence solution problem. rejects well-established understandingextending Appealsthat speculation meaning "sky decision," 2540, arguments, none withstands unconvincing threat professes decline raise soon 2542. expectation surrender "want time." troubling levels. rests apparent Nation's judges jurors unwilling accept zealous advocacy once "antagonize[d]" punish advocates rulings. stunning slur commonplace request, verdict *2556 acquittal. element crimeeven obvious, movement interstate commercethen dismissed. angered motions, troublesome objections vent anger punishing lawyer way, shirk duties judicial displeasure. suggestionit least, counsel's advocate client. bedrock competent proof: "[T]he protected `counsel acting advocate.' Anders 386 738, 743, 1396, 493 (1967). envisioned occurred. loses character adversaries, guarantee violated." Cronic, 466 648, 656-657, 104 2039, 80 657 (footnotes ABA Model Professional Responsibility, Canon 7-1, Compendium Responsibility Standards lawyer, client represent zealously bounds ..." instant defend clients. convict, fact. (Of universe crimes, ranging homicide robbery, element.) identified analyst; prosecutorial linked State's doubt. Unless ashamed inexplicable hoping derelict works. sure unfounded. surmises analysis." optimistic prediction work. plan "highlight[ing]" harm supposes. *2557 reach testify, grants windfall: (which acquittal) pledge, hear exchange chance government's collapses. harmless, possess detract hope, 7-8, statistics. gains formidable transport Zealous concessions: lenient sentence relinquishing power. reassurance enacted else "forfeit" "by silence." shifting reduce valid "shift whatever." 2541. welcome, premise flawed. Even "simplest form" demand, service, requirements, instance demanding presence, affirm 481-485 violate "impos[e] court." board. assessment disruption, 10 asserts, today." 11. assures "there the[se] States." inspection, promised. Seven decided themselves bound These *2558 assertion jurists independently "adopted" Quite debate seven sweep. Belvin, 986 516, 526 (Fla.2008) (Wells, ("I reach" (citations overbroad endorse Were jurisdictions change Moreover, wake recent. widespread, mandates fail reassure different Five citationsincluding casescome reduced right. Colorado: 668-671 (Colo.2007), Colo.Rev.Stat. 16-3-309 (defendant trial); Georgia: Compare Miller 266 Ga. 850, 854-855, 472 S.E.2d 74, 78-79 (1996) (striking cause, analyst), Illinois: McClanahan, 191 Ill. 127, 133-134, 246 Dec. 97, 729 470, 474-475 (2000), Comp. Stat., 725, 5/115-15 "within days" "receipt report"); Oregon: Or., lawful), Ore.Rev. Stat. 475.235 (2007) 15 trial). fifth Mississippi, excuses someone. Barnette 481 788, 792 (Miss.1985) (cited Court), McGowen 859 320, 339-340 (Miss.2003) test). Mississippi's reconciled caused place affirmed. Appendixes authorities held, test: Vietor, M.J. 69, (C.M.A.1980) report); Cosgrove, 181 562, 574-578, 436 A.2d 40-41 (same); Howard 473 835, 838-839 (D.C.1984) Baber 775 258 (Fla.2000) (blood-alcohol test); Harvard, 356 452, *2559 253 346 (1969) DeRosa First rel. Carson City, 115 Nev. 225, 232-233, 985 157, 162 (1999) curiam) Coombs, 149 N.H. 321-322, 821 1030, 1032 (2003) Fischer, 459 N.W.2d 818 (N.D. Carter, 593 932 1261 report; law); Tavares, 590 872-873 (R.I.1991) bodily fluid); Hutto, 325 S.C. 221, 228-230, 432, (1997) (fingerprint); Best, 146 Ariz. 3-4, 703 548, 550-551 (App.1985) Christian, N.M. 776, 895 676 (App.1995) Sosa, Wash.App. 678, 684-687, 800 839, 843-844 report). injuries: 41, 157-159, 554, 833 561, 627-628 Henson 332 773, 774-776 (Del.1975) (treating physician's injuries, redacted); Collins 267 Ind. 233, 235-236, 369 423 (1977) Wilburn, 196 113, 115-118, 198 765, 765-766 (1940) (hospital death) Parker, 83 (1852) (coroner's death)); Garlick, 313 Md. 209, 223-225, 545 27, 34 (1988) (blood drug); Kirtdoll, 391 370, 385-391, 217 37, 46-48 (1974) injuries); Spikes, 411-415, 1122, 1128-1130 (1981) Kreck, 86 Wash.2d 112, 117-120, 542 782, 786-787 (1975) murder blood poison). instruments Ing, Haw. 466, 467-473, 575, 577-579 (1972) car's speedometer order), accord, Ofa, 9 Haw.App. 130, 135-139, 828 817-818 breathalyzer order); Ruiz, 120 534, 903 845 Dilliner, 212 W.Va. 135, 141-142, 569 211, 217-218 (2002) Huggins, 659 613, 616-617 (Alaska App.1982) Conway, 70 Or.App. 721, 690 1128 upholding analyst: Johnson 303 Ark. 12, 18-20, 863, 866-867 Davison, 321 (Iowa 1976), Iowa 691.2 Crow, Kan. 690, 974 Christianson, 404 999 (Me.1979) Miller, N.J. 417, 436-437, 790 *2560 144, 156 Smith, 312 361, 381-382, 323 316, 328 analyst); Hancock, 317 9-12, 926, 928-930 (1993) (same), (reducing burden); Hughes, 713 58 (1986) Magruder 275 283, 295-300, 119-121 "call performing analysis," expense); Mayfield-Ulloa, 817 603 (Colo.App. 1991) Matthews, 632 294, 300-302 (La. App.1993) hold confrontation: Torres, 60 271, 589 (X ray body); 434, 440 1978) Taylor, 486 239, 241-243 (Mo.1972) (microscopic comparison wood chip clothing scene); Snider, 220, 229-230, 1204, 1210 Porter, 46 A.D.2d 307, 311-313, 362 N.Y.S.2d 249, 255-256 Robertson 211 62, 64-68, 175 260, 262-264 (1970) Wash.2d, P.2d, 364, 389-391, 345 63-64 (1959) Henson, 775-776 physician victim); La., So., death); Md., A.2d, Reddick, 68-69, 248 425, 426-427 (1968) factual opinions, examiner); Nisonoff, 293 420 (1944) Wester 528 1179, 1183 1974) Best 141, 143 (Del.1974) Rines, 9, (Me.1970) (manufacturer's blood-alcohol kit exception); McIlwain 700 586, 590-591 (Miss.1997) Taking personnel: Sandoval-Tena, 138 Idaho 908, 912, 71 1055, 1059 rule); Spears 241 148 (Miss.1970) (nurse's constitution); *2561 James, 179 (1971) (chemical fluid Cole 839 (Tex.Crim. App.1990) Workman, 2005 UT ¶¶ 9-20, 639, 642-643 2002 WI 58, 32-55, Wis. 99, 118-127, 644 919, 928-932 109-117, N.W.2d, 924-927 (no testified summary lay reaffirm applicability 178 1970) business); Foster, 422 (1967) foundation laid introduction Moon 300 354, 367-371, 478 695, 702-703 insufficient foundational manner); cf. 215, falls "firmly rooted" exception). espoused changed degree: Lewis, 294 684, 907 injuries hearsay), Mich., 372, Lewis deny entry case"), McDaniel, 469 (police hearsay); Tims, 137-138, 348, 350 St.2d, N.E.2d, 1128-1130; Henderson, (Tenn.1977) confrontation), abrogated (statute waived NOTES [1] 2544-2545, 2546 J.), hold, custody, device, custody," 2546, everyone hands called. quotation, 1988), "gaps admissibility." evidence; (if objects) live. Additionally, equipment maintenance nontestimonial infra, 2550-2551, [2] pre-Roberts 462, (1969). Others irrelevant, involved treatment 258, 258-259 (Fla. 2000); 34-35 [3] waived, failure offending 2554. [4] Gray Maryland, 523 185, 118 1151, (1998). distinguish "incriminating face" "bec[omes] incriminating... trial," 191, 1151 nontestifying codefendant's confession, redacted remove mention instruction confession nonconfessor. latter rights. 190-191, 1151. [5] surely always. analyses, autopsies tests, repeated, specimens lost degraded. [6] 2555, "rel[y] measure" crime-lab resolve swore Melendez-Diaz, confrontation; acumen Mme. Curie veracity Mother Theresa. discuss refute empty [7] likewise involve affairs, litigation. Rhodes, Leach 24, (1742) (admitting ship's muster-book); Martin, Camp. 100, 101, 1095 (1809) (vestry book); Aickles, 390, 391-392, 297, 298 (1785) (prison logbook). [8] 2553 misplaced. Dowdelland noted (2006)the innocence. 330-331, [9] 19th notion Waite, 264, (1865); Shivers Newton, 45 N.J.L. 469, 476 (Sup.Ct.1883); Campbell, 64 402, 585, 586 (1888). defendantswho selling adulterated milkobjected chemists' defeated chemist came forward [10] back-of-the-envelope calculations appearances ruling. 2549-2550. unfounded assumptions: case; substance; stipulation made, assumptions wildly unrealistic, figures reflect occurred [11] Johnson, 982 672, 680-681 (Fla.2008); 666-667 (Colo.2007); 216, (2007); March, S.W.3d 663, (Mo.2007); 914 12-13 (D.C.2006); Caulfield, 722 304, 310 (Minn.2006); Las Vegas Walsh, 121 899, 904-906, 203, 207-208 (2005); (2000); (1996); (Miss.1985). [12] 2557, statutes, "requir[e] analyst." occasion pass constitutionality variety label. referred [of] statutes," 2541, constitutional; States; notice-and-demand, predicted materialized. [13] 2555-2556, aspersions judges, trust antagonized requests refrain clients' interests own) furthered intention challenging. [14] express harmless. address instance. Cf. 1021-1022, determination, disagree contention, 2556, "only [the] fact" cocaine." retention alters (including circumstantial evidence) sufficient sustain conviction.

Classification Label: 0