United States confrontation clauseexpert testimony

Smith v Arizona

602 U.S. 779 (2024) (No. 22-899)

JurisdictionUnited States

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

Year2024

StatusBinding authority

Key Principle

When a prosecution expert conveys an absent forensic analyst's out-of-court statements as the basis for the expert's opinion, and those statements support the opinion only if true, they are admitted for their truth and so implicate the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause.

Area of Law

evidence

Related Cases

In re Grand Jury (attorney-client privilege) 598 U.S. 24 (2023)

United States v Zubaydah 595 U.S. 195 (2022)

FBI v Fazaga 595 U.S. 344 (2022)

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Smith v Arizona and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Smith v Arizona