Supreme Court Overturns Texas Murder Conviction Over Expert Witness Testimony

The autopsy on the victim was performed by a deputy medical examiner, but she was not made available to testify at the trial by prosecutors. The Supreme Court overturned the murder conviction of a Texas man, Jared Holton Seavey, who argued that the prosecution’s use of a medical expert who did not conduct the autopsy violated his constitutional rights. The case now returns to the Court of Appeals of Texas for the 14th District for further consideration. The Supreme Court vacated the ruling of the Court of Appeals of Texas in light of a previous case, Smith v. Arizona, where prosecutors violated a defendant’s right to confront witnesses. Seavey objected to the admission of the expert opinion based on the confrontation clause of the U.S. Constitution. Despite the objection, the jury convicted Seavey, and he was sentenced to 99 years in prison. The appeals court rejected Seavey’s appeal, stating that the expert’s testimony was permissible as it was based on independent analysis. Seavey argued in a petition filed with the Supreme Court that the expert’s opinion could not have been arrived at merely by observing autopsy photos. The Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney urged the Supreme Court to deny the petition, stating that the evidence used at trial did not implicate the confrontation clause of the Constitution. The cause of death was already proved by crime scene photographs and Seavey’s confession. The article includes related stories and links to legal documents for further reference. Please rewrite this sentence.

Source link