Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Verde

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 19, 2005PublishedCited by 103 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtIreland, J.

This appeal raises the question whether, in light of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (Crawford), the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that laboratory technicians who analyze drugs seized as part of a criminal investigation authenticate their laboratory findings by appearing at a defendant’s trial. Because we conclude that a drug certificate is akin to a business record and the confrontation clause is not implicated by this type of evidence, we answer in the negative and affirm the conviction.

After a Superior Court jury convicted…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Commonwealth v. SaferianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  3. Commonwealth v. KozecMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  4. Commonwealth v. FitzgeraldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
  5. Commonwealth v. MelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by103 opinions

  1. Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. People v. GeierCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  3. People v. RawlinsNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. State v. ChunSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
  5. Commonwealth v. VasquezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010

98 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API