http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/06/25/lab-reports-not-enough-chemist-must-testify/ Irreverent and insightful observations on criminal law Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:01:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/06/25/lab-reports-not-enough-chemist-must-testify/comment-page-1/#comment-1899 The Criminal Lawyer» Blog Archive » No, Virginia, You Can’t Get Around the Confrontation Clause by Shifting the Burden of Proof Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:04:34 +0000 http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/06/25/lab-reports-not-enough-chemist-must-testify/#comment-1899 [...] On June 25 last year, the Supreme Court held in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts that in a drug case the prosecution can’t simply use a sworn lab report to prove the existence of a controlled substance. If the chemist doesn’t testify, it violates the Confrontation Clause. (See our previous post about it here.) [...] [...] On June 25 last year, the Supreme Court held in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts that in a drug case the prosecution can’t simply use a sworn lab report to prove the existence of a controlled substance. If the chemist doesn’t testify, it violates the Confrontation Clause. (See our previous post about it here.) [...]

]]>