No. 23-6795
Gregory Taylor v. United States
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: confrontation-clause criminal-procedure evidence expert-testimony hearsay laboratory-evidence laboratory-tests sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2024-07-01
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is satisfied when an expert witness provides opinion testimony that is based on data from laboratory tests performed by someone who is not testifying
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is satisfied when an expert witness provides opinion testimony that is based on data from laboratory tests performed by someone who is not testifying.! ' A very similar question is presented in Smith v. Arizona (S. Ct. No. 22-899), cert. granted, Sept. 29, 2023, argued Jan. 10, 2024. . ii
Docket Entries
2024-07-02
Petition DENIED.
2024-06-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 7/1/2024.
2024-05-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2024.
2024-04-22
Memorandum of respondent United States filed.
2024-03-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 22, 2024.
2024-03-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 22, 2024 to April 22, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-02-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 22, 2024)
Attorneys
Gregory Taylor
Doris Randle-Holt — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Doris Randle-Holt — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent