Sixth Amendment Right to Confront the Witnesses

In LUIS E. MELENDEZ-DIAZ, PETITIONER v. MASSACHUSETTS 2009 U.S. LEXIS 4734, the Supreme Court held that the admission of the certificates violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.

At the petitioner's state-court drug trial, the prosecution introduced certificates from state laboratory analysts stating that material seized by police and connected to the petitioner was cocaine of a certain quantity. As required by Massachusetts law, the certificates were sworn before a notary public and were submitted as prima facie evidence of what they asserted. The petitioner objected, asserting that Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, required the analysts to testify in person. The trial court disagreed, the certificates were admitted, and the petitioner was convicted. The Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed, rejecting the petitioner's claim that the certificates' admission violated the Sixth Amendment.  The Melendez-Diaz case has changed the landscape for contesting drug and hot urinalysis cases and has given the defense a big advantage.  If you have come up hot on a urinalysis and would like to consider fighting the charges against you, it is critical that you contact a court martial defense lawyer who understands drug crimes in the military as well as the current state of the law with regard to confrontation and litigation packets.