The People, Plaintiff and Respondent v. Virginia Hernandez Lopez, Defendant and Appellant — Liu, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Liu, dissenting, would conclude that the laboratory analyst’s notations concerning the blood sample and testing process were testimonial because they were generated through a formal, government-controlled evidentiary process for use in a criminal prosecution. She would further find that introducing those statements through a surrogate analyst violated the Confrontation Clause and that the error was prejudicial because the logsheet supplied the critical link between the defendant and the blood-alcohol results. Justice Corrigan, concurring, agreed with the result but would analyze the notations under the primary-purpose test and treat most as nontestimonial business records.