People v. Dungo
Annotate this CaseAt Defendant's murder trial, a forensic pathologist testifying for the prosecution described to the jury objective facts about the condition of the victim's body as recorded in the autopsy report and accompanying photographs. Based on those facts, the expert gave his independent opinion that the victim had died of strangulation. Neither the autopsy report, which was prepared by another pathologist who did not testify, nor the photographs were introduced into evidence. The court of appeal reversed Defendant's conviction for second degree murder, holding that the expert's testimony violated Defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront and cross-examine the preparer of the autopsy report, and that the error was prejudicial. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting the expert's testimony over a Confrontation Clause objection, as the statements of the preparer of the autopsy report were not testimonial, and the Confrontation Clause did not bar their use.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.