In order to convict someone of drug trafficking in Boston, prosecutors must first prove that the drugs in question actually exist. This almost always requires some degree of analysis in a laboratory. Lab technicians must determine that the substances recovered from the defendant are actually prohibited, and this may require significant analysis of the drug’s chemical structures. But what happens when the person who tested the drugs can’t testify? Can prosecutors call upon some other “substitute expert” to speak about the test results? This is a question that the Supreme Court of the United States was forced to answer.
Supreme Court Sends Important Drug Trafficking Question Back to State Court
On June 21, the Supreme Court was asked to review a decision about a substitute expert in a drug case. The expert in question testified about analysis that he did not actually perform, and the defendant argued that this was a violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. Specifically, he argued that he had a right to face his accuser. This is also known as the “confrontation clause.”
The Supreme Court mostly disagreed with this sentiment, although they left the door open for further debate in the future. Although the Justices were unanimous, many had very different things to say about how this type of situation should be handled. Justice Alito provided one of the most interesting comments, stating that the substitute expert “stepped over the line” and “testified to the truth of the matter asserted.”
Could the Supreme Court Ban Substitute Experts?
Despite the unanimity of the Supreme Court's decision, the court may one day prevent substitute experts from testifying about drug analyses that they did not perform. Such testimony is routinely offered during drug trafficking trials in Massachusetts, and a potential Supreme Court decision could have serious implications.
If prosecutors have no other choice but to locate the specific technician or analyst who performed the lab tests, they may struggle to get the testimony they need. It is much easier to find a random analyst who just so happens to work at the same lab, and this is a strategy that has served prosecutors well over the years. In the Commonwealth, prosecutors must present forensic evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt the exact chemical composition of the drugs in question.
Where Can I Find a Defense Attorney for Drug Distribution Charges in Boston?
If you are serious about fighting your drug distribution charges in Boston, contact Edward R. Molari, Attorney at Law. We have helped numerous defendants over the years, including those who face drug trafficking charges. We know how crucial drug testing analysis can be, and we can help you fight for your constitutional rights during this legal process. Book your consultation today to discuss the most appropriate defense strategy in more detail.