U.S. v. Hall, 58 M.J. 90

First Principles: Constitutional Matters: Confrontation

1. the right to cross-examination is at the core of the confrontation clause

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Art. 112a -- Wrongful Use, Possession, etc, of Controlled Substances Pre-2019 offenses

1. evidence of urinalysis tests, their results, and expert testimony explaining them is sufficient to permit a factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused used contraband drugs; the factfinder may draw a permissible inference of wrongfulness from a circumstantial showing of drug use based on such evidence; this evidence is legally sufficient as long as the defense evidence of innocent ingestion could be reasonably disbelieved by the factfinder; "urinalysis" is not, however, a synonym for "conviction."

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Defenses: Innocent Ingestion

1. evidence of urinalysis tests, their results, and expert testimony explaining them is sufficient to permit a factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused used contraband drugs; the factfinder may draw a permissible inference of wrongfulness from a circumstantial showing of drug use based on such evidence; this evidence is legally sufficient as long as the defense evidence of innocent ingestion could be reasonably disbelieved by the factfinder; "urinalysis" is not, however, a synonym for "conviction."

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Expert / Scientific Testimony

1. evidence of urinalysis tests, their results, and expert testimony explaining them is sufficient to permit a factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused used contraband drugs

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Inferences

1. evidence of urinalysis tests, their results, and expert testimony explaining them is sufficient to permit a factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused used contraband drugs; the factfinder may draw a permissible inference of wrongfulness from a circumstantial showing of drug use based on such evidence; this evidence is legally sufficient as long as the defense evidence of innocent ingestion could be reasonably disbelieved by the factfinder

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Scientific Evidence

1. evidence of urinalysis tests, their results, and expert testimony explaining them is sufficient to permit a factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused used contraband drugs

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Witnesses: Confrontation

1. the right to cross-examination is at the core of the confrontation clause
2. where the government pitted appellant against hearsay attributed to her own mother without affording appellant the opportunity to test the reliability or trustworthiness of her mother’s statements by cross-examination, appellant was denied her constitutional right of confrontation through cross-examination

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Witnesses: Experts

1. evidence of urinalysis tests, their results, and expert testimony explaining them is sufficient to permit a factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused used contraband drugs

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. despite the constitutional underpinning of hearsay, not every instance in which hearsay is improperly admitted will rise to the level of a constitutional error; errors in admitting hearsay where an accused has had the opportunity to cross-examine the declarant have been found to be nonconstitutional violations