No. 22-899

Jason Smith v. Arizona

Lower Court: Arizona
Docketed: 2023-03-16
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
Amici (10)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: 6th-amendment confrontation-clause criminal-procedure criminal-trial expert-testimony forensic-analysis sixth-amendment subpoena testimonial-evidence
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2023-09-26 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to present testimony by a substitute expert conveying the testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment permits the prosecution in a criminal trial to present testimony by a substitute expert conveying the testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst, on the grounds that (a) the testifying expert offers some independent opinion and the analyst’s statements are offered not for their truth but to explain the expert’s opinion, and (b) the defendant did not independently seek to subpoena the analyst. (i)

Docket Entries

2024-08-20
Record returned to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One.
2024-07-23
Judgment and Mandate Issued.
2024-06-21
Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-899_97be.pdf'>opinion</a> of the Court, in which Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson, JJ., joined, and in which Thomas and Gorsuch, JJ., joined as to Parts I, II, and IV. Thomas, J., and Gorsuch, J., filed opinions concurring in part. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., joined.
2024-01-10
Argued. For petitioner: Hari Santhanam, Chicago, Ill. For United States, as amicus curiae: Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Alexander W. Samuels, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Phoenix, Ariz.
2023-12-29
2023-12-20
Brief amici curiae of American Board of Forensic Toxicology, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2023-12-20
Brief amici curiae of National District Attorneys Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2023-12-20
Brief amici curiae of Colorado, et al. filed. (Distributed). (Corrected paper form of brief received and distributed--December 28, 2023--original electronic submission contains correction.)
2023-12-20
Brief amicus curiae of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)
2023-12-13
Respondent's request to lodge non-record material pursuant to Rule 32.3 filed.
2023-12-13
2023-12-11
Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
2023-12-07
Record received from the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One (one envelope). The remainder of the record is electronic and is available with the Clerk.
2023-11-30
CIRCULATED
2023-11-28
Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.
2023-11-21
Record requested from the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One.
2023-11-20
Brief amici curiae of The Innocence Network, Forensic Justice Project, et al.. filed.
2023-11-20
2023-11-20
2023-11-20
Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.
2023-11-20
Brief amicus curiae of United States in support of neither party filed.
2023-11-17
2023-11-17
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, January 10, 2024.
2023-11-13
Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
2023-11-13
2023-09-29
Petition GRANTED.
2023-07-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-07-11
2023-06-26
2023-05-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 26, 2023.
2023-05-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 25, 2023 to June 26, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-04-25
Response Requested. (Due May 25, 2023)
2023-04-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/11/2023.
2023-04-07
Waiver of right of respondent Arizona to respond filed.
2023-03-14

Attorneys

Alameda County Public Defender and California Public Defenders Association
Joshi Ashoma ValentineAlameda County Public Defenders, Amicus
Joshi Ashoma ValentineAlameda County Public Defenders, Amicus
American Board of Forensic Toxicology, et al.
Kendra Nychel BeckwithLewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, Amicus
Kendra Nychel BeckwithLewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, Amicus
Arizona
Alexander Westbrook SamuelsArizona Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Alexander Westbrook SamuelsArizona Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
Kent S. ScheideggerCriminal Justice Legal Fdtn., Amicus
Kent S. ScheideggerCriminal Justice Legal Fdtn., Amicus
Jason Smith
Hari SanthanamPerkins Coie LLP, Petitioner
Hari SanthanamPerkins Coie LLP, Petitioner
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, American Civil Liberties Union, and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Arizona
Timothy Patrick O'TooleMiller & Chevalier Chartered, Amicus
Timothy Patrick O'TooleMiller & Chevalier Chartered, Amicus
National College for DUI Defense, Inc.
Michelle Lynn BehanThe Behan Law Group, PLLC, Amicus
Michelle Lynn BehanThe Behan Law Group, PLLC, Amicus
National District Attorneys Association et al
Albert Calvin LocherNational District Attorneys Association, Amicus
Albert Calvin LocherNational District Attorneys Association, Amicus
Oklahoma, Colorado, 36 Additional States, 1 Territory, and 1 Federal District
Garry Michael Gaskins IIOffice of Oklahoma Attorney General, Amicus
Garry Michael Gaskins IIOffice of Oklahoma Attorney General, Amicus
Richard D. Friedman
Richard D. Friedman — Amicus
Richard D. Friedman — Amicus
THE INNOCENCE NETWORK, FORENSIC JUSTICE PROJECT, AND THE CENTER FOR INTEGRITY IN FORENSIC SCIENCES, INC.
Anna K. SortunTonkon Torp LLP, Amicus
Anna K. SortunTonkon Torp LLP, Amicus
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Amicus
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Amicus