The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Smith v. Arizona that substitute expert testimony violates the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.
The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Smith v. Arizona that the use of substitute expert testimony violated a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. The case involved an Arizona drug defendant, Jason Smith, whose original expert witness was unavailable for trial. The court decision strengthens the Confrontation Clause, ensuring defendants can cross-examine expert testimonies based on out-of-court statements.
June 21, 2024
3 Articles