Welcome to The Briefcase

Commentary and analysis of Ohio criminal law and whatever else comes to mind, served with a dash of snark.  Continue Reading »

×

July 25, 2006

I put off writing anything about Crawford v. Washington for over a month, and now I can't shut up about it...

We discussed the decision last week, here and here, and I came across some additional stuff.  I mentioned a couple of months ago the statute which permits the state to introduce drug tests without the testimony of the chemist who performed them.  Even when "live" testimony for a test is given, it often happens that someone other than the person who actually performed the tests will testify, based upon the latter's notes.  And it's not uncommon for records of the calibration or other information concerning breathalyzers to come in under the business records exception to the hearsay rule.

Does any of this violate Crawford?  The 3rd District thought so last year, throwing out a conviction where the state sought to introduce DNA tests through someone other than the person who'd actually performed them.  The 6th District, though, came to a contrary conclusion, holding in a DWI case that documents establishing that the breathalyzer was properly calculated and that the officer performing the test was qualified to do so were properly admitted as business records.

The Ohio Supreme Court certified the conflict between the two cases, and will probably rule on it early next year.  Stay tuned.

Search

Recent Entries

  • October 16, 2017
    En banc on sentencing
    The 8th District takes a look at what State v. Marcum means
  • October 13, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Musings about the death penalty and indigent defense
  • October 11, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS starts its new term, and the Ohio Supreme Court hands down two decisions
  • October 10, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Collaboration by inmates, fun in Juvenile Court, the limits of Creech, and more
  • October 5, 2017
    State v. Thomas
    The Ohio Supreme Court reverses a death penalty conviction
  • October 4, 2017
    Russ' Excellent Adventure
    A juror doesn't like me. Boo-hoo.
  • October 3, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    What not to argue on appeal, waiving counsel, the perils of being a juvenile, and expert witnesses
  • September 12, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Prior consistent statements, whether State v. Hand is applied retroactively, and a big Coming Attraction
  • September 11, 2017
    Case Update
    Looking back at Melendez-Diaz, and the 8th goes 0 for 2 in the Supreme Court
  • September 8, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Pro bono work, screwed-up appeals, and is Subway shorting their customers?