United States v. Brian K. Ellis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that to be “testimonial,” it is necessary—but sometimes not sufficient—for a statement to have been made by a de-clarant who reasonably expected “that it would be used for later prosecution”
• holding that medical records establishing presence of methamphetamine in defendant’s system were nontestimonial business records, and thus admission of medical records did not violate defendant’s right to confront witnesses
• recognizing that statements embodied in business records are nontestimonial
• finding that medical records, and the accompanying certificates that attested to the records’ authenticity, were non-testimonial and their admission did not violate Crawford
• “Given the records themselves do not fall within the constitutional guarantee provided by the Confrontation Clause, it would be odd to hold that the foundational evidence authenticating the records do.”
• describing Rule 902(11) certificates as “foundational evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).