Hairston v. State

Summary

The Court held that the State violated the applicable statutory framework by substituting an observing officer for the seizing and packaging officer whom the defendant timely demanded as a witness. General authentication principles did not excuse the State's failure to produce the specifically designated witness, so admitting the forensic chemist's testimony and report was reversible error. The convictions for aggravated possession of heroin and possession of marijuana were reversed and the matter was remanded.