Major Municipal Court and Criminal Cases By Kenneth Vercam men , Esq. What is Crawford -Defendan t ’s right of confronta t ion was violated by admit t ing into evidence a lab certificate. Chemist required State v. Berezansky 386 NJ Super 84 (App. Div. 2006) Nurse Who Withdre w Blood Can Be Required to Testify in DWI Case. State v. Renshaw 390 NJ Super. 456 (App. Div. 2007) In this case the state introduced a certificate signed by a Nurse who drew blood. The Court held that the admission in evidence of the Uniform Certification for Bodily Specimens Taken in a Medically Acceptable Manner, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A: 62A- 11, without the opportunity for cross-examination of the nurse who drew the blood, and over the objection of defendant, runs afoul of the right of confrontation protected both by the United States and the New Jersey Constitutions. Therefore, the Nurse Can Be Required to Testify in DWI Blood Case. Defendan t Can Contest DWI Blood Lab Reports Hearsay. State v. Kent 391 NJ Super. 352 (App. Div. 2007)
As
1. State m e n t by eye witness not admissible as emerg ency investiga t ion. State in the Interest of J.A. 195 NJ 324 (2008 ) . The hearsay statements were a narrative of past events and made while neither the declarant nor victim was in imminent danger. The statements were testimonial and, because the declarant was not produced as a witness or subject to crossexamination, the admissions of the statements violated J.A.’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.
1