WILLOW GROVE, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--On October 30th, 2013, the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania issued a decision in the case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Apellee) vs. George William Yohe, II (Appellant). In this landmark decision, the Court defined who constitutes an “Analyst” for the purpose of providing testimony where forensic scientific analyses occurred. Prior decisions on this matter have been issued by individual states as well as the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). Unlike prior cases, the issues in the Yohe decision specifically addressed how forensic science laboratories should manage their casework to avoid many of the limitations identified in other decisions. NMS Labs casework model was upheld in the Yohe decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court as successfully balancing the defendant’s constitutional right to confrontation with quality forensic practice and efficient use of scarce forensic science resources.
Briefly, at question in Yohe was whether the results of blood alcohol testing could be testified to by NMS Labs toxicologist and Assistant Laboratory Director, Dr. Lee Blum, as opposed to the individuals who performed individual steps in the process such as sampling the blood and placing it on the instruments for testing. As a matter of course in his role as the analyst, Dr. Blum reviewed the chain of custody documentation, all the analytical data and other case-related material, and the quality assurance requirements. After reviewing the analytical data, he confirmed the accuracy of results, determined the concentration of defendant’s blood alcohol concentration, then authored and signed a report. In other words, Dr. Blum served in the role of the Analyst for the case, who performed all the necessary steps in order to ensure that the testing was accurate and he issued a forensically defensible report.
In their unanimous opinion, the Justices showed a clear understanding of the process used by NMS Labs, explained how it addressed the defendants right to confrontation under the sixth amendment of the U.S. Constitution and addressed succinctly the factors that distinguished NMS Labs practices from those in prior SCOTUS cases on this topic. Specifically, they individually addressed prior decisions by the SCOTUS on key cases, including Melendez-Diaz, Bullcoming and Williams.
NMS Labs is proud to have been part of a ground-breaking decision that affects forensic science practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and throughout the United States, with a clear process that ensures constitutional protections, while ensuring that laboratories can operate efficiently and economically without compromise to forensic quality. This decision should benefit all parties involved in such cases by giving clarity to what defines the “Analyst.”
About NMS Labs:
NMS Labs is an ISO accredited, international forensic and clinical reference laboratory that is unsurpassed in its scope, accuracy of results, scientific expertise and innovation. The state-of-the-art facilities include clinical, forensic and research capabilities, dedicated and secure crime laboratories, and are staffed by more than 250 highly-trained professionals. NMS Labs is passionate about promoting public health and safety.
