Whether the Confrontation Clause prohibits a substitute state analyst from testifying at trial as to the composition of a seized substance obtained as evidence

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Confrontation Clause prohibits a substitute state analyst from testifying at trial as to the composition of a seized substance obtained as evidence where (1) the substitute analyst did not participate in the lab testing in any way and only reviewed the notes and data upon which the initial conclusion was based, and (2) the test was produced to prove the truth of the matter asserted, namely the chemical composition of the substance, which is an element of the offence. i