State v. Gilmore

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia held that a video recording of a confidential informant’s controlled drug purchase depicted nonverbal conduct, not a nonverbal statement, because the informant did not intend his conduct as an assertion. The recording therefore did not contain a testimonial statement barred by the Confrontation Clause, even though the informant was unavailable and had not been subject to prior cross-examination. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.