Unpublished Court of Appeals opinion addressing proximate cause, chain of causation, intervening acts, and jury instructions on intervening cause and involuntary manslaughter.
State v. Anderson, 294 N.C. App. 125 (2024) (unpublished)Read More
Cases
New Jersey v. Arteaga, 6/7/2023
COA held that the defendant is entitled to face recognition information as part of requested discovery in accordance with Brady v. Maryland.
Abruquah v. Maryland, 6/2/2023
The Maryland Supreme Court discusses studies completed after the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) report in 2016 which demonstrates the lack of repeatability of the method.
State v. McCrorey, 291 N.C. App. 650 (2023)
Court of Appeals decision finding that circumstantial evidence supported the conclusion that defendant sold fentanyl instead of heroin to the victim. The court also noted “[w]hile the evidence does not foreclose the possibility that fentanyl may not have been the sole cause of [the victim’s] death, there is ample evidence to support a conclusion that …
State v. McCrorey transcript excerpt
Testimony of Dr. Jonathan Privette (forensic pathologist) and Dr. Justin Brower (forensic toxicologist) re: fentanyl overdose, mixing of fentanyl and cocaine
State v. Gallion
COA found no plain error in allowing firearm identification testimony. Former NCSCL analyst Wilson testified in detail about her methodology, but provided little information about application of the method to the case at hand.
US v. Chatrie
EDVA decision holding a geofence warrant was unconstitutional.
State v. Thomas, 2021 NCCOA-402
COA held that trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the testimonyof the State’s GSR expert because he followed the State Crime Lab’s procedures asrequired to meet Rule 702(a)’s reliability requirement where defendant made statement upon GSR collection that he had been asleep during the 5+ hour period between shooting and collection.
State v. Joyner, 2021-NCCOA-684 (unpub)
Detective testified about cell phone tower location and determined direction of tower based on records. COA held Detective’s testimony was limited to illustrating and interpreting the admitted cell phone records, therefore it did not require scientific or other specialized knowledge and was not expert testimony.
Clark v. Clark, 2021-NCCOA-653
Plaintiff argued Derek Ellington was not qualified as a digital expert. COA held Ellington testified as a lay witness, not an expert, because he testified to what he saw or experienced in making a forensic copy and demonstrating the defendant did not send the photos to others.
State v. Gibbs (unpub)(2021)
NCSCL drug chemistry analyst Jennifer West testified about whether fentanyl was an opiate or opioid. Trial court erred in admitting West’s testimony because she lacked training on the issue of whether fentanyl was an opiate or opioid.
Overturned Arson Convictions
John Lentini compiled case information on these wrongful convictions based on questionable laboratory analysis.
United States v. Gissantaner, 990 F.3d 457 (6th Cir. 2021).
State v. Martin (unpub)(2021)
A NC State Crime Lab drug chemistry expert testified to GCMS results without explaining methodology, the reliability of methodology, or the application of method to facts of the case as required by Rule of Evidence 702. It was error to admit the expert’s testimony, but the issue was not preserved and the Court of Appeals …
State v. Teesateskie (2021)
The defendant also argued on appeal that the trial court should not have allowed the State’s expert to testify as to possible reasons why Hydrocodone did not show up in the defendant’s blood test, because that testimony violated Rule 702 in that it was not based on scientific or technical knowledge, was impermissibly based on …