Also known as: forensics · forensis · forensic science
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An adjective describing materials, analyses, or procedures prepared for use in courts of law or public debate. Such items include laboratory reports, expert evaluations, and investigative techniques offered to establish facts in litigation.
Fiona Foster faces drug charges after police seize a substance from her vehicle. The prosecution offers a forensic laboratory report stating the substance is cocaine but calls no witness who performed the testing. The court excludes the report because the analyst who prepared it is unavailable for cross-examination.
Fernando Farrell stands trial for assault. A supervisor who never observed the DNA testing seeks to testify about results in a forensic report linking Farrell to the scene. The court requires the actual analyst who conducted the tests to appear for cross-examination.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Faith Fitzgerald challenges her conviction after a state proceeding that lacked standard adversarial procedures. The reviewing court examines whether the process qualified as a forensic trial under the law of the land guarantee.
Frank Fisher is prosecuted for sexual assault. An expert compares a DNA profile from vaginal swabs to the defendant's profile but relies on testing performed by an outside laboratory whose analyst does not testify. The court evaluates whether the expert's testimony introduces the underlying forensic results for their truth.
Felicia Fuentes stands accused of assault. Saliva samples taken from the victim undergo forensic testing at an FBI laboratory to determine the perpetrator. The results are prepared for use at trial and trigger confrontation considerations.
Frederick Ferguson faces civil commitment proceedings. A forensic psychiatrist evaluates his mental condition and testifies about the likelihood of future offenses. The court weighs the expert's forensic assessment in determining whether commitment satisfies constitutional standards.
Forensic laboratory reports prepared for use in criminal prosecution are testimonial statements. Their admission without testimony from the analyst who prepared them violates the Confrontation Clause because the analysts are witnesses the defendant has the right to confront through cross-examination.
The prosecution cannot avoid a confrontation violation by presenting the results of a forensic analyst's report through the testimony of a supervisor or other surrogate witness who played no role in performing or observing the testing. The actual analyst who conducted the tests must be subject to cross-examination if the report is used for its truth.
A state may not apply an evidentiary rule that categorically bars a defendant from introducing evidence that a third party committed the crime whenever the prosecution's forensic evidence strongly indicates the defendant's guilt. Excluding third-party-guilt evidence solely because of the perceived strength of the state's case violates the defendant's right to present a defense.
…The plurality correctly concludes that the expert testimony in this case did not run afoul of the Clause. The reality of modern forensic science is that DNA testing often involves multiple analysts performing discrete tasks. Requiring every analyst involved in the chain of custody or testing process to testify would impose enormous…