Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), is a significant 6th Amendment Confrontation Clause case decided by the United States Supreme Court.On June 23, 2011, the Supreme Court considered the issue whether a defendant's Confrontation Clause rights extend to a non-testifying laboratory analyst whose supervisor testifies as to test results that the analyst transcribed from a machine.
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting: 09-115: 2011-05-26 An Arizona law that sanctions employers who hire illegal immigrants is not preempted by federal immigration law. J.D.B. v. North Carolina: 09-11121: 2011-06-16 Age is relevant in Miranda cases. Bullcoming v. New Mexico: 09-10876 [dead link ] 2011-06-23
New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), the Court ruled that admitting a lab chemist's analysis into evidence, without having him testify, violated the Confrontation Clause. [ 15 ] [ 16 ] In Michigan v. Bryant , 562 U.S. 344 (2011), the Court ruled that the "primary purpose" of a shooting victim's statement as to who shot him, and the police's reason ...
Case name Citation Date decided Sykes v. United States: 564 U.S. 1: June 9, 2011 Talk Am., Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co. 564 U.S. 50: June 9, 2011 DePierre v. United States
Michigan v. Bryant, 131 S. Ct. 1143 (2011) Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 131 S. Ct. 2705 (2011) Williams v. Illinois, No. 10–8505 (June 18, 2012) Face-to-face confrontation
On March 2, 2011, King on behalf of the Respondent, New Mexico, argued before the United States Supreme Court in Bullcoming v. New Mexico. On July 10, 2012, King officially announced that he was seeking the Democratic nomination for Governor of New Mexico. [citation needed]
Salinas v. Texas (2013) Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center (2013) Chaidez v. United States (2013) Lozman v. Riviera Beach (2013) Mohamad v. Palestinian Authority (2012) Greene v. Fisher (2011) Bullcoming v. New Mexico (2011) United States v. Tinklenberg (2011) Magwood v. Patterson (2010) United States v. O'Brien (2010) Melendez ...
New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), the Court ruled that admitting a lab chemist's analysis into evidence, without having him testify, violated the Confrontation Clause. [ 15 ] [ 16 ] In Michigan v. Bryant , 562 U.S. 344 (2011), the Court ruled that the "primary purpose" of a shooting victim's statement as to who shot him, and the police's reason ...