CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL DEFENSE: COURT OF APPEALS RULES FAVORABLY ON DEFENSE MELENDEZ-DIAZ/CRAWFORD CASE
A multitude of cases were granted review last year on the Melendez-Diaz/Crawford issue. It's a hot topic. Actually, it's pretty straight forward. But it's a hot topic because it stops the prosecution from trying to convict defendant's without their ability to confront the evidence against them. And try and try and try again they will. This one stoped them in their tracks.
This California Court of Appeal ruled against the defense last year prior to Melendez-Diaz. Melendez-Diaz came out and the California Supreme Court granted
review and transferred this case back to the Court of Appeal in light of Melendez-Diaz. Take that!
Melendez-Diaz barred use of affidavits to establish that an item was contraband, as violative of Crawford and confrontation. This Court of Appeal correctly notes that the fact that evidence qualifies under a firmly-rooted hearsay exception doesn't make it an exception to confrontation. The report here that the item was meth was prepared in contemplation of its use in litigation. The Court of Appeal also rejects the AG's argument that the report here was OK because it was made contemporaneous with the test.
Finally, relying on Geier (41 Cal.App.4th 555), the AG argues that confrontation was satisfied by having the chemist's supervisor testify. Nope, says the Court of Appeal, the defense didn't get to confront the guy who DID the test. Ridiculuous. Reversed.
People v. Benitez; 2010 DJ DAR 2788; DJ, 2/25/10; C/A 4th, Div. 3
san diego criminal defense lawyer, san diego drug defense, san diego criminal defense attorney, california drug lawyer, california drug defense, california criminal defense attorney, criminal attorney in san diego,
