Volume 57

A Game of Katso and Mouse: Current Theories For Getting Forensic Analysis Evidence Past the Confrontation Clause

by Ronald J. Coleman and Paul F. Rothstein

The purpose of this Article is to analyze modern Confrontation Clause and forensic analysis jurisprudence and present six theories through which to argue that forensic analysis evidence is admissible consistent with the Confrontation Clause. The theories presented here are not intended to be employed individually, but rather combined to diminish the possibility that the Confrontation Clause will necessitate exclusion of such evidence. Part I discusses background on the Confrontation Clause. Part II describes the recent illustrative cases of Katso and Stuart. Part III presents our six theories and explores how local stakeholders might utilize Katso-like reasoning to support their positions.

Keep Reading

Subscribe to ACLR