Supreme Court Dumps Confrontation Clause Case Without Fanfare

On Monday, the Supreme Court sent the case of Briscoe v. Virginia back to Virginia without comment.  This is an interesting development because they agreed to hear this case so soon after issuing a decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts.  On June 29, 2009 we published a blog discussing this interesting development.  In Briscoe the Court ruled that defendants have a constitutional right to cross examine lab technicians who prepare lab reports in drug cases.  The ruling was based on the Sixth Amendment right to confront your accusers.  About a week later, the Supreme Court decided to accept the appeal in Briscoe which essentially dealt with the same issue as in Melendez-Diaz.  The question in Briscoe was whether the state could produce a certificate of a lab technician instead of being required to call him to testify in court.  Court watchers were left scratching their heads when the court agreed to hear Briscoe.  The Supreme Court actually heard oral arguments on Briscoe on January 11, but on Monday, the sent the case back to Virginia.  This decision leaves the precedent in Melendez-Diaz intact and leaves the issue settled.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Supreme Court Adds Confrontation Clause Case

In it's final act of the term, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case involving the Confrontation Clause of the 6th Amendment. The case is Briscoe v. Virginia. The question in that case is whether it is proper for the state to introduce a certificate of a forensic lab technician without being required to present the actual testimony of the lab technician? Does that violate the 6th Amendment? Virginia courts found there was no constitutional violation because the defendant is allowed to call the lab technician as a witness in their case. This grant of certiorari comes on the heals of the case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts decided last week by the Supreme Court. The decision to grant certiorari to this case was the last act of the term by the Supreme Court.

For more information about the Chicago Criminal Defense Attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Supreme Court Rules In Crime Lab Case

Last week the United States Supreme Court ruled that defendants have a constitutional right to cross examine crime lab analysts who prepare lab reports on drug cases and other cases. Roughly 20 states give defendants the right to cross examine the analysts that prepare lab reports. Illinois is one of those states. However, about 30 states do not give defendants that right. Massachusetts did not give Luis Melendez-Diaz the right to cross examine and challenge the lab reports when he was convicted of possession of cocaine. Massachusetts courts rejected his plea to challenge the lab reports and he was turned down. On Thursday the Supreme Court ruled in his favor and found that he had a constitutional right to confront his accusers. The court ruled that Melendez had the right to question the lab analyst about testing methods, how the evidence was preserved and any other issues.

The case involved some unusual alliances. The majority consisted of Justices Scalia, Ginsberg, Souter, Stevens and Thomas. The dissent consisted of Kennedy, Roberts, Alito and Breyer.

The case is Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 07-591.

For more information about the Chicago Criminal Defense Attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.