Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyers Nationwide
The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces will hear a case where the evidence provided in the defendants urine is being contested under the Confrontation Clause of the 6th Amendment. Facing a Criminal Charge? Please call (800) 759-5813.
{ 0 comments }
A Superior Court judge in California ruled that evidence supplied by red light cameras to issue traffic citations is inadmissible as hearsay under the Constitution.
{ 0 comments }
A Massachusetts state legislator has introduced a bill to make it more difficult for accused drug offenders to game the court system as a result of current evidence requirements.
{ 0 comments }
Only a year after the Supreme Court’s controversial Melendez-Diaz decision, court watchers are awaiting possible revisions to that decision.
{ 0 comments }
The Massachusetts Supreme Court rejected a challenge to blood evidence in an OUI case on grounds of violation of the confrontation clause and the Melendez-Diaz case. As reported in Mass Lawyer’s Weekly, a blood test taken at a hospital, and submitted as evidence of intoxication in a drunk driving case, could be used without additional [...]
{ 0 comments }
With respect to Melendez-Diaz decision, we still see far too much griping about some of the inconveniences to prosecutors and to the state. We’ve written about this before, but it can’t be stated enough: The purpose of the US Constitution is not to make prosecuting criminals convenient and efficient. It is quite the opposite: to [...]
{ 0 comments }
The Melendez-Diaz decision that 6 months ago changed the rules requiring witness testimony in criminal cases with forensic evidence, has resulted in a backlog in Virgina crime labs.
{ 0 comments }
In an unusual move, the US Supreme Court will hear a case that could alter or overrule the Melendez-Diaz decision, a case from just six months ago.
{ 1 comment }
This fall’s Boston Bar Journal has an excellent overview of the Melendez-Diaz decision it’s legal origins, and practical implications going forward. The author discusses prior cases such as Crawford v. Washington, and more recent cases (Tabaka v. District of Colombia and Grant v. Commonwealth of Virginia) that expand the scope of the Melendez-Diaz decision. Also [...]
{ 0 comments }
The Melendez-Diaz decision continues to reverberate in criminal court cases that use documentary evidence without expert testimony. In Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Hollister, the Massachusetts Appeals Court determined that a certified document of ballistic evidence in a gun possession case violated the defendants right to confront his accuser, as outlined in Melendez-Diaz.
{ 0 comments }
