Judges: Melendez-Diaz and Bullcoming are going to remain good law for decades, at least
Too many trial judges resisted Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), which bars testimonial hearsay evidence on the statements of a witness who does not testify at trial. The Supreme Court responded by confirming this principle in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 129 S.Ct. 2527 (2009).
Too many trial judges proceeded to resist Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts. The Supreme Court responded by confirming this principle in Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 131 S.Ct. 2705 (2011).
Thanks to Maryland’s Court of Appeals for having reconfirmed last Thursday that the foregoing Supreme Court cases are good and binding law, including prohibiting forensic experts from parroting back the scientific conclusions reached by their colleagues when the prosecution’s testifying forensics expert has not observed nor otherwise directly participated in the scientific analysis performed by the expert’s colleagues. Derr v. Maryland, ___ Md. ___ (Sept. 29, 2011).