Smith v. Arizona
United States Supreme Court
144 S. Ct. 1785 (2024)
- Written by Nathan Benedict, JD
Facts
Jason Smith was charged with possession of illegal drugs. Elizabeth Rast, a crime-lab analyst, tested the items found in his possession. She made notes and signed a report concluding that the items she tested were methamphetamine and cannabis. Shortly before Smith’s trial, Rast left her job. The prosecution called a different analyst, Greggory Longoni, as an expert witness at trial. Longoni did not test any of the items but rather testified based entirely on his review of Rast’s report and notes. Longoni offered his expert opinion that the items were methamphetamine and cannabis. Smith was convicted and appealed. His convictions were affirmed on appeal, and he sought review by the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kagan, J.)
Concurrence (Thomas, J.)
Concurrence (Gorsuch, J.)
Concurrence (Alito, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 926,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,400 briefs, keyed to 1,003 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.




