State v. Richard Lavon Deadwiller, 2012 WI App 89, supreme court review granted 1/14/13; affirmed, 2013 WI 75; case activity A report from an “outside” lab (Orchid Cellmark) relied on by a State Crime Lab technician for “investigative” purposes in developing a DNA match between defendant and assailant wasn’t “testimonial,” therefore didn’t violate confrontation: ¶1… Read more
6. Confrontation, 6th Am.
State v. Matthew Owen Hoff, Jr., 2011AP2096-CR, District 3, 6/26/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity ¶19 Here, before arresting Hoff, Gostovich observed him sleeping behind the wheel of a running car that was parked horizontally against the vertical parking stalls. Hoff did not awake to Gostovich’s shouting or knocking. When he finally awoke, he was… Read more
Sandy Williams v. Illinois, USSC No. 10-8505, 6/18/12, affirming People v. Williams, 238 Ill. 2d 125, 939 N.E. 268 A split Court (4-1-4) upholds against Confrontation objection, admissibility of expert testimony that a DNA profile, produced by a different lab, matched Williams’ profile. Because the rationale favoring admissibility doesn’t earn a clear majority of votes, the opinion… Read more
Hardy v. Irving L. Cross, USSC No. 11-74, 12/12/11, reversing Cross v. Hardy, 7th Cir No. 09-1666 The Seventh Circuit grant of habeas relief, on the ground “the state failed to demonstrate that it employed good faith efforts to locate the complainant” before declaring her “unavailable” and allowing her prior testimony to be read to… Read more
State v. Richard Dean Boyer, 2011AP305-CR, District 1, 8/16/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Boyer: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; case activity OWI trial, where the chemist who analyzed the blood sample testified, but the person who drew the sample didn’t: the court rejects Boyer’s argument that his right to confrontation was… Read more
State v. Olu A. Rhodes, 2011 WI 73, reversing unpublished COA decision; for Rhodes: John J. Grau; case activity Although the State’s theory of motive was that Rhodes intentionally shot and killed the victim in retaliation for beating Rhodes’ sister the day before, the trial court reasonably precluded cross-examination of the sister on a prior instance… Read more
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
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
