tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post1626748931133778386..comments2023-08-24T10:39:23.460-04:00Comments on CAAFlog: Hard cases may make bad law, but the Harcrow case makes important lawDwight Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11657981110237418710noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-71082954831919382272008-03-14T16:29:00.000-04:002008-03-14T16:29:00.000-04:00Yes, the discussion of waiver and forfeiture is ve...Yes, the discussion of waiver and forfeiture is very interesting and will be useful. Does it seem to anyone else that the concurrances are much ado about the necessary "legal fiction"? This case goes a long way in consolidating and explaining Crawford related issues. IMHOAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-55235594495760245402008-03-14T11:05:00.000-04:002008-03-14T11:05:00.000-04:00When I wrote the brief, I was offended that the de...When I wrote the brief, I was offended that the defense counsel didn't challenge the lab results--which said nothing about how the drug test was conducted, the qualifications of the tester, etc. I knew that the trial was pre-Crawford, but hoped that it would apply retroactively. I didn't have faith in Judge Ryan's position that the lab results would be excluded pre-Crawford. <BR/>Now that I'm a state prosecutor, I can't imagine putting on the drug lab results without having the expert testify.Jeff Stephenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02978904130111370537noreply@blogger.com