Today the Supreme Court held in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. __, 129 S. Ct. 2527 (2009), that a state forensic analyst’s laboratory certificate prepared for use in a criminal prosecution violated petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. The Court noted that the certificates were affidavits falling squarely within the "core class of testimonial statements" covered by the Confrontation Clause as set forth in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004).
Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg, joined. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Kennedy filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. and Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined.
Writing for the 5 to 4 majority, Justice Antonin Scalia indicated:
"This case involves little more than the application of our holding in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U. S. 36. The Sixth Amendment does not permit the prosecution to prove its case via ex parte out-of-court affidavits, and the admission of such evidence against Melendez-Diaz was error. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Appeals Court of Massachusetts and remand the case.... "
A copy of the opinion in is available here. More on Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts is available on the Melendez-Diaz Resource Page.
Comments
Post new comment