Commonwealth v. Zeininger

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the notation of certification at issue appeared “on the same report as the results of the breathalyzer test”
• noting that confrontation clause guarantees defendant opportunity to confront \any person . . . whose testimonial statements are introduced against him\ [quotation and citation omitted]
• distinguishing certificates of drug analysis offered as direct proof of an element of the offense charged from Office of Alcohol Testing certification records, which “bear only on the admissibility or credibility of the evidence”
• distinguishing certificates of drug analysis 42 offered as direct proof of an element of the offense charged from Office of Alcohol Testing certification records, which “bear only on the admissibility or credibility of the evidence”
• out-of-court statement offered for its truth is inadmissible unless it falls into a recognized hearsay exception
• breathalyzer certification and accompanying 21 diagnostic records, created with “two independent evidentiary purposes,” are nevertheless not created in anticipation of litigation because they are “systematically” generated pursuant to statutory duty

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).