Case Citator › Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts

Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
557 U.S. 305
Decided
Confirmed treatments
3
Flagged citations read
206 of 206
Citing cases (total)
2,800
Treatment dates
2010–2012
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts has been limited. All 206 flagged citations have been processed; 3 confirmed adverse treatments are listed below.
Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

2,800 later cases cite Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts; 206 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The court declined to extend Melendez-Diaz's trial-stage confrontation rule to sentencing proceedings.

    Wallace v. State · Arkansas Court of Appeals · filed

    The United States Supreme Court has never applied the Confrontation Clause to sentencing, and the Melendez-Diaz decision does not extend that application.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The court declined to extend Melendez-Diaz to bar an independent expert's testimony when the expert did not perform the autopsy but the autopsy report itself was not admitted.

    State v. Gonzales · New Mexico Court of Appeals · filed

    In the realm of Confrontation Clause analysis, we, too, refuse to extend the holdings of Crawford, Melendez-Diaz, and Bullcoming II and to toss a blanket ban on the testimony of an expert witness about the circumstances of the death of the victim in those instances when the expert did not perform the autopsy and the autopsy report has not been admitted into evidence.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The court confined Melendez-Diaz to criminal trials and held that it did not govern confrontation rights in supervised-release revocation proceedings.

    United States v. Genaro Delbosque · Fifth Circuit · filed

    Contrary to Delbosque’s contention, McCormick remains good law in the wake of these cases since both Melendez-Diaz and Bullcoming pertain to a defendant’s confrontation rights in a criminal trial rather than during revocation proceedings.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace