State of Maine v. Rochelle Gleason

Summary

The court vacated Gleason’s conviction because the toxicologist’s testimony conveyed out-of-court laboratory data and documentation for their truth, implicating the Confrontation Clause. The court held that the expert’s reliance on those materials could not be justified merely as explaining the basis of her opinion, but it declined to decide whether the statements were testimonial because that issue had not been developed below. The case was remanded for a new trial, at which the testimonial question may be addressed in the first instance.