CAAF Opinion Digest · one opinion, every topic

U.S. v. Cavitt, 69 M.J. 413

Decided Feb 25, 2011 · No. 11-0210/AF · September 2010 Term · Opinion (PDF)

Digested under 3 topics

First Principles: Constitutional Matters: Confrontation

  1. the Confrontation Clause is not satisfied by reliability - it requires confrontation of the declarant of testimonial hearsay
  2. a surrogate expert witness’s testimony regarding drug test results violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment in a prosecution for wrongful use of marijuana, where the testimony drew attention to and repeated portions of the testimonial hearsay contained on the drug test report cover memorandum

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Hearsay › Generally

  1. the Confrontation Clause is not satisfied by reliability - it requires confrontation of the declarant of testimonial hearsay

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Witnesses: Confrontation

  1. the Confrontation Clause is not satisfied by reliability - it requires confrontation of the declarant of testimonial hearsay
  2. a surrogate expert witness’s testimony regarding drug test results violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment in a prosecution for wrongful use of marijuana, where the testimony drew attention to and repeated portions of the testimonial hearsay contained on the drug test report cover memorandum
Source and status

This is a verbatim mirror of the Opinion Digest and opinions tables published by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The headnotes are the court staff’s summaries of the opinions, reproduced as published; they are not the opinions themselves and not this site’s commentary. Nothing here is edited on this site.

Last updated by the court: Oct 13, 2026 · mirrored Oct 29, 2026 · Always confirm a holding against the opinion itself (linked from each case name).