25 September 2007

Where's Crawford

SCOTUSBLOG is reporting that the Supreme Court granted review in 17 cases today. After reviewing the list, I noticed that the Court did not grant review in the Missouri case in which the State asked the Court to settle the split in the state courts over whether lab reports prepared by at the request of law enforcement are testimonial.

This is an important issue and one that state, federal, and military courts are facing on a daily basis. So for the immediate future at least, judges and counsel will still have to grapple with the question without help from SCOTUS.

That means the CAAF will be on its own when it decides the following case, scheduled for oral argument on 6 November.

United States v. Josh R. Harcrow, No. 07-0135/MC
(Appellee) (Appellant)

Counsel for Appellant: Maj Jeffrey S. Stephens, USMC
Counsel for Appellee: Capt James W. Weirick, USMC

Case Summary: GCM conviction of AWOL, possession of drug paraphernalia, cocaine and heroin, use of methamphetamine and cocaine, manufacturing methamphetamine, and escaping custody. Granted issue questions whether the lower court erred by finding that two Virginia state forensic laboratory reports were not testimonial hearsay under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004).

No comments: