Prof. Friedman, over at The Confrontation Blog, just posted a recent article on two New Jersey opinions that overlap the confrontation analysis for lab results in Bullcoming, Williams, Crawford, and Melendez-Diaz.
The plurality opinion in Williams regarding experts and the confrontation clause is central to both cases.
It's becoming expressly clear that a defense counsel nowadays better have a handle on the intricacies of Williams, because its holding(s) are becoming vitally important in cases where data is collected from one (non-testifying) witness, while the analysis is done by another (testifying) witness.
This is especially true in DNA cases.
Right now understanding Williams is as important as understanding Crawford was a decade ago.
Here's the article: