Legal Opinion
State v. Aragon
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided February 12, 2010No. 31,187PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHÁVEZ, Chief Justice.
{1} Anthony Aragon (“Defendant”) appeals his conviction for possession of methamphetamine, arguing that his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him was violated when a chemical forensic report was admitted into evidence based on testimony from an analyst who had not prepared the report. The Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction, holding that admission of the report did not implicate Defendant’s confrontation rights because the report is non-testimonial hearsay under State v. Dedman, 2004-NMSC-037, ¶ 30, 136 N.M. 561, 102 P.3d 628. State v.…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Davis v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- State v. TollardoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. CabezuelaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. LargoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. BullcomingNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. NavaretteNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2013
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.