This is the content. This is demonstration text. Click 'edit' above to create your own content.
Commonwealth v. Dyarman, --- A.3d ----, 2011 WL 5560176 (Pa.Super.), 2011 PA Super 245
The court was asked to decide whether admission of the calibration records of an Intoxilyzer 5000en violated the Confrontation Clause absent testimony from the individual who performed the accuracy checks.
Held: The calibration logs were admitted to establish the chain of custody and accuracy of the device; they were not created in anticipation of Appellant's particular litigation, or used to prove an element of a crime for which Appellant was charged. Thus, the logs were not “testimonial” for purposes of the protections afforded by the Confrontation Clause.
Have you been charged with a DUI San Francisco, DUI Marin, DUI Sonoma or DUI Napa? My name is Paul Burglin and I am a San Francisco Bay area drunk driving attorney who for over 25 years has specialized in drunk driving defense in San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma, Napa and surrounding communities. I am also the co-author of "California Drunk Driving Law"
Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics
© 2015 Paul Burglin, esq. All Rights Reserved.