Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 982 SO2D 672 - State v. Johnson

State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
May 2017
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Crawford v. Washington · Ohio v. Roberts · Pointer v. Texas · Davis v. Washington · 41 Cal. 4th 555 - People v. Geier

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In this case, the lab report in question is from FDLE [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] and not from a hospital where testing is done almost exclusively for medical treatment. Furthermore, as the Second District noted, while a lab report from FDLE is that of a “record kept in the regular course of business” the nature of this report, in comparison to a hospital lab report, is that it is “intended to bear witness against an accused.” * * * While Crawford does not detail the types of business records that are non-testimonial, we find a distinction between records that are prepared as a routine part of a business’s operation and records that are prepared and kept at the request of law enforcement agencies and for the purpose of criminal prosecution. An FDLE lab report is prepared pursuant to police investigation and is introduced by the prosecution to establish an element of a charged crime .... We agree with Johnson that the FDLE lab report in this case is the functional equivalent of an affidavit sub mitted instead of testimony from a live witness. It was prepared for litigation and written to prove critical elements of the prosecution’s case. [[Image here]] We agree with those states that find lab reports and similar materials, when prepared for criminal trials, to be testimonial statements and that their admission without the preparer’s testimony runs afoul of Crawford and the Confrontation Clause.... In the instant case, the trial court erred in admitting the FDLE lab”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinion, or diagnosis, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make such memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the customary custodian or other qualified witness, or as shown by a certification or declaration that complies with paragraph (c) and s. 90.902(11), unless the sources of information or other circumstances show lack of trustworthiness. The term “business” as used in this paragraph includes a business, institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of very kind, whether or not conducted for profit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.