≡ Menu

j. “Testimonial” Evidence

On Point is very pleased to present this Guest Post discussion of Bullcoming v. New Mexico by Daniel D. Blinka, Professor of Law, Marquette University of Virginia. (Cross-posted at Marquette.)  Professor Brandon L. Garrett, Virginia, also has a Guest Post on Bullcoming. Feel free to submit comments in the box at the end of the Post. Note… Read more

{ 0 comments }

On Point is very pleased to present this Guest Post discussion of Bullcoming v. New Mexico by Brandon L. Garrett, Professor of Law, University of Virginia. (Cross-posted at ACS. On Point has made a minor editing change in the first sentence, to add the date of decision.) Professor Garret has previously guest-posted on DNA and habeas procedure.  Professor Daniel… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Docket Decision below: People v. Williams, 238 Ill. 2d 125 (Ill. S. Ct. No. 107550) Question Presented (by the Court): Whether a state rule of evidence allowing an expert witness to testify about the results of DNA testing performed by non-testifying analysts, where the defendant has no opportunity to confront the actual analysts, violates the Confrontation Clause… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Confrontation – Lab Report Certification

Donald Bullcoming v. New Mexico, USSC No. 09-10876, 6/23/11 The question presented is whether the Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to introduce a forensic laboratory report containing a testimonial certification—made for the purpose of proving a particular fact—through the in-court testimony of a scientist who did not sign the certification or perform or observe the… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Marvin L. Beauchamp, 2011 WI 27, affirming 2010 WI App 42; for Beauchamp: Craig S. Powell; case activity Confrontation – Dying Declaration, § 908.045(3) ¶34  We therefore, like every state court that has considered the dying declaration exception since Crawford, take a position consistent with the language of Crawford and Giles and decline… Read more

{ 0 comments }

7th circuit court of appeals decision Habeas – Certificate of Appealability We pause briefly to note the district court’s error in denying a certificate of appealability in this case. The statute provides that a certificate of appealability may issue “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Michigan v. Bryant, USSC No. 09-150 At respondent Richard Bryant’s trial, the court admitted statements that the victim, Anthony Covington, made to police officers who discovered him mortally wounded in a gas station parking lot. … We hold that the circumstances of the interaction between Covington and the police objectively indicate that the “primary purpose of… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Mark D. Jensen, 2011 WI App 3; prior history: 2007 WI 26; for Jensen: Terry W. Rose, Christopher William Rose, Michael D. Cicchini; case activity; (Jensen BiC not posted); State Resp.; Jensen Reply Confrontation – Generally The Confrontation Clause regulates testimonial statements only, such that nontestimonial statements are excludable only under hearsay and other evidence-rule ¶¶22-26, citing Giles v… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS