October Term 2023 · Docket 22-899
Can a substitute expert testify to another analyst's lab results?
The dispute centers on whether a substitute expert may relay another analyst's lab results without violating the Sixth Amendment.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official Court opinion was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Smith's counsel argued the substitute expert conveyed out-of-court testimonial statements without personal knowledge.
Arizona's counsel argued the testimony was not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
Justice Alito noted that competent defense counsel could have requested a judgment of acquittal based on evidence.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 49-13 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 49-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-43 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-33 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 51-35 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 51-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 47-43 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 47-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 77, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 77, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 78, lines 31-29 — Transcript, file page 78, lines 31-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 80, lines 53-53 — Transcript, file page 80, lines 53-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 9-43 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 9-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 82, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 82, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 83, lines 7-7 — Transcript, file page 83, lines 7-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Jason Smith argues the state violated his confrontation rights. The state argues the testimony did not prove truth.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 10, 2024.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 15-27
What each side wants
Smith wants the conviction overturned because a substitute expert relayed another analyst's statements.
Arizona wants the conviction to stand because the testimony did not prove the truth of the matter.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
What each side says
Smith argues the substitute expert lacked personal knowledge of the testing performed by the original analyst.
Arizona argues evidence not offered for the truth of the matter asserted does not implicate the Confrontation Clause.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked why defense counsel could not simply question the substitute expert about the lab work.
Justice Thomas asked why the statements are testimonial and how they differ from the report in Williams.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 49-13 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 49-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-43 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-33 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 51-35 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 51-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 47-43 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 47-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 77, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 77, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 78, lines 31-29 — Transcript, file page 78, lines 31-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 80, lines 53-53 — Transcript, file page 80, lines 53-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 9-43 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 9-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 82, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 82, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 83, lines 7-7 — Transcript, file page 83, lines 7-7
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of expert testimony in criminal trials. It determines whether defendants can cross-examine the actual analyst who performed the testing. The outcome shapes the scope of the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 49-13 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 49-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-43 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-33 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 51-35 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 51-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 47-43 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 47-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 77, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 77, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 78, lines 31-29 — Transcript, file page 78, lines 31-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 80, lines 53-53 — Transcript, file page 80, lines 53-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 9-43 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 9-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 82, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 82, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 83, lines 7-7 — Transcript, file page 83, lines 7-7
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Verified official opinions and orders
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 23-7 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 23-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 25-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 25-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 45-33 — Transcript, file page 98, lines 45-33
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.