US v. Oates case brief

1. US v. Oates (2d Cir 1977)
1. govt called another chemist from the same office as Weinberg, who couldn’t make it; she testified that the substance was her*in, using W’s lab report and notes; Δ objects that she can’t be vehicle for W’s notes b/c he is here to cross-examine W
2. holding: report and notes don’t satisfy 803(8) exception
• 803(8)(B) excludes matters observed by other law enforcement personnel
• 803(8)(C) allows such evidence in proceedings against the Government in criminal cases, but not against the accused.
1. embraces the view that Cong intended to prevent use of the rule to allow the govt to present trial by affidavit
3. rationale – when we move from private businesses to public officers, and if we imagine a criminal prosecution, we hold out specter of serious confrontation clause problems.