Michaels v. State Personnel Bd.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that lab reports are not testimonial because they are neither discretionary nor based on opinion
• holding that laboratory report was merely report of scientific data and therefore was non-testimonial business record
• concluding that \[c]ertificates of chemical analysis are neither discretionary nor based on opinion\ and are thus not testimonial
• holding that drug certificates “merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test determining the composition and quantity of the substance” and are within the state public records hearsay exception
• holding that drug certificates \merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test determining the composition and quantity of the substance\ and are within the state public records hearsay exception
• holding that laboratory report of analysis of cocaine fell within a business or public records exception to the Confrontation Clause well established under Massachusetts law and noted in Crawford

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).