If you want to read about a large number of issues in federal criminal law in one place, you should check out United States v. Moore. Beach reading it isn’t.
From whether a person on trial can be forced to wear a stun belt during trial, to a discussion of race-based strikes to members of the jury, to testimony about religious conversions and ineffective assistance of counsel, this 128-page beast of an opinion has everything.
There’s even an 11 page concurring opinion on race-based jury strikes!
I am not going to write about all of it.
The court reversed a number of counts on confrontation clause grounds. Interestingly, between the date of the trial in 2005 and when the appeal was decided in 2011, the law of the confrontation clause changed dramatically.
Some background – under the Sixth Amendment, a person accused of a crime has the right to confront his or her accusers. Normally, that means a person – or, really, the person’s lawyer – gets to cross-examine anyone who is offering evidence for the government.
This gets tricky when the government tries to introduce forensic evidence. Actually, strike that – it isn’t “tricky”, it’s cumbersome.
As any viewer of ads for TV shows on CBS knows, the government keeps crime labs in their police departments. And in those labs, people analyze evidence to present at trial. The question is whether the person who does the tests, and actually knows what happened when the evidence was tested, has to testify, or if someone from the lab can just say what generally happens when evidence is tested (hint: someone is found guilty).
The Supreme Court has very recently held that yes, the Constitution applies to people in crime labs too – even if they look really good on CSI.
Between when this case was tried and when it was decided on appeal, the constitutional ground moved, and, now, what happened at trial wasn’t ok.
So, those counts were remanded.
For everything else in the opinion, please check it out here.
- D.C. Circuit: Prosecutors’ Comments Not Enough For New Trial (legaltimes.typepad.com)
- US Supremes Expand Crawford/Melendez-Diaz (ejdirga.wordpress.com)
- The Confrontation Blog
- Cross-examination for everyone!
- More on Melendez-Diaz
- Why Melendez-Diaz is good policy
If you have questions about how federal criminal charges are different than state criminal charges, please visit this page on Maryland federal criminal charges or Washington DC federal criminal charges.