Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We agree with the defendant that the Supreme Court should not have admitted, over his objection, the testimony of the People's DNA expert because such testimony violated the defendant's right of confrontation (see US Const Sixth Amend). In order to satisfy the Confrontation Clause where the People seek to introduce testimonial DNA evidence, "an analyst who witnessed, performed or supervised the generation of defendant...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.