Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
State v. Huettl
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided March 1, 2013No. 34,009; Docket No. 31,141Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partVigil, Judge
{48} I concur in the suppression issue disposition, but respectfully dissent in regard to the confrontation clause.
{49} The Sixth Amendment directs: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right... to be confronted with the witnesses against him[.]” Crawford holds that the right of confrontation protected by the Sixth Amendment applies to “testimonial” out-of-court statements. 541 U.S. at 51. For the following reasons, I conclude that the test results performed by Ms. Nardoni were admitted as substantive testimonial evidence at Defendant’s trial and that Defendant was…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- United States v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
- United States v. Angela KhorozianCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2003
- United States v. Charles W. BlackburnCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- State v. MadorieSupreme Court of Missouri · 2005
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.