New York State Cases

SUPREME COURT IN THE NEWS      

In Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, the Court ruled that admission of a report of a lab analysis identifying material seized from the defendant as cocaine without testimony by the analyst  violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation.   The Court relied on Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36  (2004) in reaching its decision. Read the decision.  The NACDL, of which the NYSACDL is an affiliate,  submitted amicus briefs in support of Melendez. Read the brief.

In Safford Unified School District #1, et al v. Redding, the Supreme Court held that the strip-search of a 13-year old girl by school officials violated the Fourth Amendment. Read the decision.   The Court continues to apply the standard of reasonable suspicion in the context of a school search. However, that search must be reasonable in scope. Here, the information of alleged wrongdoing did not support the "quantum leap" from search of outerclothing and a backpack to a degrading and highly intrusive search of the child's underwear.  The Court declined to hold school officials liable for damages because the legality of this type of search was not "clearly established law" at the time of the search.  
  
The Supreme Court has ruled that the due process clause does not grant a convicted prisoner the substantive right to DNA testing. District Attorney’s Office for the Third Judicial District et al v. Osborne.  In declining to extend constitutional due process protections to include DNA testing on post-conviction relief, the Court observed that the handling of DNA testing is best left to the state legislatures, the majority of which have enacted comprehensive laws governing access to DNA testing. Thus, while the decision will not affect inmates in states, including New York, which have enacted laws permitting post-conviction access to DNA testing, inmates challenging their convictions will not be able to seek such testing as a matter of federal constitutional right.  http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-6.pdf