Supreme Court Decides
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts
Confrontation Clause Case (No. 07–591)
The Supreme Court held in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts today 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 Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg, joined. Justice Thomas wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Kennedy filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Breyer and Alito joined.
Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice 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 today's opinion is available here.
More information will be posted on tomorrow’s Federal Evidence Blog.
Further background information on the case is available on FederalEvidence.com's Melendez-Diaz Resource Page.
This resource includes:- An Overview Of The Case
- Key Briefs & Other Materials
- Additional Background Materials
- Key Cases
- Coverage in the Federal Evidence Blog
