Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 6/16/2014

Commonwealth v. Tassone

Citations

468 Mass. 391
11 N.E.3d 67
2014 WL 2619649
2014 Mass. LEXIS 413
2014 Mass. App. LEXIS 66

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

defendant could not meaningfully cross-examine Commonwealth’s expert witness where DNA was analyzed at different laboratory in different State from where expert worked
\our common law of evidence requires that the defendant have a meaningful opportunity to cross-examine the expert about her opinion and the reliability of the facts or data that underlie her opinion\
confrontation right violated where expert did not work for laboratory and could not testify to procedures, protocols, and reliability of data on which expert's opinion was based
\Our common law of evidence is more protective of confrontation rights . . .\
“Our evidentiary rules permit the facts or data underlying the opinion to be elicited only by the defendant on cross-examination and, where this door has been opened by the defendant, by the prosecution on redirect examination”
substitute DNA expert's opinion improperly admitted where expert was not affiliated with testing analyst's laboratory, had no personal knowledge of laboratory's protocols, and had not seen testing analyst's worksheets generated during testing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gants

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.