United States v. Cavitt
2011 CAAF LEXIS 149
C.A.A.F.2011Background
- Cavitt challenged the admission of a drug testing report via a surrogate witness as a Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause issue.
- The drug testing package included a cover memorandum, custody documents, logs, and machine printouts; the declarant on the cover memorandum did not testify.
- Appellant was convicted of marijuana use and assault, along with other specifications under the UCMJ.
- AFCCA found error in the cover memorandum admission but held the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and admitted remaining parts as a business record under Magyari.
- This Court reversed and remanded to reconsider Harcrow-type analysis and to assess harmlessness in light of Blazier II.
- The opinion discusses how Magyari relied on a reliability framework now deemed insufficient after Crawford; calls for fresh Confrontation Clause analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Confrontation Clause violation | United States argues admissibility via surrogate and business records rationale. | Cavitt contends testimonial hearsay was improperly admitted. | Remanded for reconsideration of harmless error per Blazier II. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Blazier, 69 M.J. 218 (C.A.A.F. 2010) (Crawford overruled reliability-based hearsay)
- United States v. Magyari, 63 M.J. 123 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (machine printouts treated as business records)
- United States v. Harcrow, 66 M.J. 154 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (case governing admissibility of laboratory records under Magyari)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (Confrontation Clause testimonial hearsay rule)
- Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (U.S. 1980) (reliability-based exception framework for hearsay)