Part I of this Article will analyze Melendez-Diaz with a focus on extracting indicators within the opinion that lend guidance as to how the opinion could be extended to Bullcoming and to expert testimony based on forensic reports in controlled substance cases. Part II will provide an overview of the tests utilized by the SBI to determine the nature and quantity, if any, of suspected controlled substances with the goal of ascertaining who, under Melendez-Diaz, should be subject to confrontation. Part III will provide a prediction of the outcome in Bullcoming. Finally, Part IV will review the pending cases from the North Carolina Court of Appeals addressing expert testimony based on non-testifying analysts' reports and will offer an analysis showing that the expert testimony in these cases is insufficient under the Sixth Amendment.
John Wait, Another "Straightforward Application": The Impact of Melendez-Diaz on Forensic Testing and Expert Testimony in Controlled Substance Cases, 33 Campbell L. Rev. 1 (2010).