Moon v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1DissentRodowsky, Judge
I respectfully dissent.
The issue is whether admitting Moon’s hospital record into evidence, including particularly the results of the blood alcohol test, violated Moon’s right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” U.S. Const. Amendment VI. Here the business records statute was the exclusive basis for evidentiary competency. But the Confrontation Clause does not prohibit a court in a criminal case from receiving into evidence a hospital record reporting the objective results of a scientific test which was ordered for purposes of treatment and which was conducted by a technician…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Sumner v. MataSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Dutton v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Mancusi v. StubbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.