Supreme Court favors Indian man in his DWI conviction case

An Indian man's constitutional rights were violated when he was convicted of DWI in New Mexico, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today.

Donald Bullcoming was never given an opportunity to question the analyst who performed a blood alcohol test. That violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, the court said.

"As a rule, if an out-of-court statement is testimonial in nature, it may not be introduced against the accused at trial unless the witness who made the statement is unavailable and the accused has had a prior opportunity to confront that witness,"
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the 5-4 majority.

Bullcoming already completed his sentence but the ruling could lead to the charge being removed from his record.

Get the Story:
MIA Tech Helps Accused Drunken Driver's Case (Courthouse News Service 6/23)
Supreme Court Overrules N.M. High Court in DWI Case (AP 6/23)

Supreme Court Decision in Bullcoming v. New Mexico:
Syllabus | Opinion [Ginsburg] | Concurence [Sotomayor] | Dissent [Kennedy]

Related Stories:
SCOTUSblog: Justice Scalia makes the case for Indian defendant (3/3)
Supreme Court to hear case over Indian defendant's conviction (3/1)
Supreme Court will hear dispute over Indian man's conviction (10/5)

Join the Conversation