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.
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
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 ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more
In Barker v. Wingo (1972), the Supreme Court developed a four-part test that considers the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the defendant's assertion of his right to a speedy trial, and the prejudice to the defendant. A violation of the Speedy Trial Clause is cause for dismissal with prejudice of a criminal case. Within these ...
The New Mexico Supreme Court dismissed Griffin's appeal in November 2022 on procedural grounds and in February 2023 denied his request for reconsideration, prompting Griffin's appeal to the U.S ...
The elk populations in New Mexico are all species reintroduced between 1912 and the 1950s, Ryan Darr, a spokesperson for the state Department of Game and Fish, said in an email to the Journal.
This page was last edited on 21 February 2012, at 22:12 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.