From our private database of 26,900+ case briefs...
Bullcoming v. New Mexico
United States Supreme Court
131 S. Ct. 2705 (2011)
In August 2005, Donald Bullcoming (defendant) was suspected of driving drunk. The police obtained a warrant for a blood-alcohol analysis. A sample of Bullcoming’s blood was drawn at a hospital and sent to the New Mexico Department of Health, Scientific Laboratory Division (SLD) for testing. The test was administered by Curtis Caylor, a forensic analyst. Caylor signed a certification and issued a report averring that the test was properly administered and that Bullcoming’s blood sample contained very high blood-alcohol content (BAC). At trial, the State of New Mexico (plaintiff) introduced Caylor’s report but did not call Caylor to the stand. The prosecution instead sought to call Gerasimos Razatos, a scientist at SLD. Razatos had not taken part in or observed the testing of Bullcoming’s blood sample. Bullcoming opposed introduction of the report without Caylor’s testimony on the grounds that it would violate his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him. The trial court overruled his objection and allowed the report as a business record. Bullcoming was convicted of aggravated driving while intoxicated. The New Mexico Court of Appeals upheld the conviction. The New Mexico Supreme Court acknowledged that Caylor's report was testimonial evidence but held that admission of the report did not violate the Confrontation Clause because (1) Caylor merely transcribed the results of the testing conducted by machine and made no independent judgment himself, and (2) Bullcoming’s right to confront was preserved because Razatos was qualified as an expert to interpret the machine results. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Ginsburg, J.)
Concurrence (Sotomayor, J.)
Dissent (Kennedy, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 541,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 541,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 26,900 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.