FSN: Forensic Science News » Melendez-diaz

Another Attempt By the State to Shield Forensics From Cross-Examination

Forensics Guy — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 20:02:11 +0000

FGI-FSN —

Another case to be heard by the US Supreme Court where the State doesn’t want their forensic science evidence questioned by the defense.

ON Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Williams v. Illinois, the latest in a string of cases addressing whether the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause — which gives the

[Continue Reading Another Attempt By the State to Shield Forensics From Cross-Examination...]

MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASSACHUSETTS

No Forensic Science Exemption to US Constitution

Forensics Guy — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:00:33 +0000

FGI-FSN —

In a 5–4 non-partisan ruling, the United States Supreme Court further clarified the defendant’s right to confront their accuser in criminal cases.

Where Melendez-Diaz ruled the prosecution could not simply submit a crime laboratory report as evidence, June 23, 2011’s ruling in Bullcoming v. New Mexico further explains the courts decision to uphold the

[Continue Reading No Forensic Science Exemption to US Constitution...]

No related posts.

Melendez-Diaz Under Attack by Prosecutors

Forensics Guy — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:00:16 +0000

FGI-FSN —

Apparently prosecutors don’t like criminal defense attorneys to cross-examine forensic scientists. They’d rather just have a piece of paper in court that can’t be cross-examined. To that goal the recent Melendez-Diaz decision is up for review.

Prosecutors hope that the new Justice Sotomayor (an ex-prosecutor herself) will side with them, throw due process

[Continue Reading Melendez-Diaz Under Attack by Prosecutors...]

No related posts.

Laboratory Analyst Falsifies Lab Report

Forensics Guy — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:37:29 +0000

FGI-FSN —

A forensic laboratory analyst dry-labs cases. That is, they didn’t actually perform the forensic testing they are supposed to, and instead just simply authors reports that indicate a crime has occurred.

A former chemist with Erie County’s crime laboratory admitted she failed to conduct the proper forensic tests in a local drug

[Continue Reading Laboratory Analyst Falsifies Lab Report...]

Creative Solution For Melendez-Diaz Testimony Complaints

Forensics Guy — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:00:02 +0000

FGI-FSN —

If Arkansas can come up with a simple way to allow analysts to testify without seriously effecting their ability to continue their laboratory duties, why all the hand-wringing and whining in other states?

The link allows examiners at the crime lab to testify without leaving their office.

“I’m very pleased with it and I’ve encouraged

[Continue Reading Creative Solution For Melendez-Diaz Testimony Complaints...]

Virginia sneaks around Melendez-Diaz, to deny 6th Amendment to Accused

Forensics Guy — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:00:51 +0000

FGI-FSN —

Looks like Virginia, not happy with the US Supreme Court trying to ensure defendants’ 6th Amendment rights, is trying to find a sneaky way around the Melendez-Diaz ruling.

Following Melendez-Diaz, the Virginia legislature took action almost immediately. Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia called a special session of the legislature to amend the state’s statute

[Continue Reading Virginia sneaks around Melendez-Diaz, to deny 6th Amendment to Accused...]

The Sky is Falling!!! — More Melendez-Diaz Complaints

Forensics Guy — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:00:13 +0000

FGI-FSN —

Here is another “scare tactic” article posted to show why it isn’t “fair” for the defendant to face their accuser — constitutional right be damned.

The state’s approximately 160 technicians had been subpoenaed only 43 times in July 2008, but they were called a whopping 925 times in July 2009 after the high court

[Continue Reading The Sky is Falling!!! — More Melendez-Diaz Complaints...]

Ohio seems to “get it”

Forensics Guy — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:15:53 +0000

FGI-FSN —

As opposed to Wisconsin, Ohio seems to understand that the defendant has the right to cross-examine that ACTUAL analyst who performed the work, not just someone who “reads the report.” Maybe Melendez-Diaz is having an effect.

Original article posted here:

CLEVELAND — Some prosecutors fear criminal investigations could be delayed as the Ohio Supreme

[Continue Reading Ohio seems to “get it”...]

Wisconsin Department of Justice doesn’t “get it”

Forensics Guy — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:00:28 +0000

FGI-FSN —

The Wisconsin Department of Justice doesn’t seem to get what Melendez-Diaz is about. It’s not about someone being in court to “read” the results, it’s about being able to effectively cross-examine the actual analyst who performed the tests specific to the case at trial.

“We don’t think the Melendez-Diaz decision will have a

[Continue Reading Wisconsin Department of Justice doesn’t “get it”...]

More Melendez-Diaz Whining

Forensics Guy — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:54:10 +0000

FGI-FSN —

No the sky won’t fall, but forensic scientists are going to have to do a more complete job. Not only analyzing the evidence, and writing reports, but also explaining their results to the trier of fact, and defending their opinions against cross-examination.

It’s interesting to see prosecutors so worried about this ruling.

[Continue Reading More Melendez-Diaz Whining...]

More on Melendez-Diaz

Forensics Guy — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:16:35 +0000

FGI-FSN —

The following article can be viewed in full here.

The article opens up with this statement:

Get ready to trade your lab coat for a suit coat. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling last Thursday will require crime lab analysts to appear in court and submit to cross-examination if their reports are entered into evidence. This

[Continue Reading More on Melendez-Diaz...]

MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASSACHUSETTS

Forensics Guy — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:16:36 +0000

FGI-FSN —

The recent Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts has sent a shockwave through the forensic science community in the United States.

In a community comment forum for forensic scientists, there was a comment from an analyst from another country, that stated they didn’t see what the big deal

[Continue Reading MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASSACHUSETTS...]