Williams v. Illinois
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-8505 | Supreme Court of Illinois | Dec 6, 2011 | Jun 18, 2012 | 5-4 | Alito | OT 2011 |
Holding: The admission of expert testimony about the results of DNA testing performed by non-testifying analysts did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 18, 2012. Justice Breyer filed his own concurring opinion, while Justice Thomas filed an opinion in which he concurred in the judgment only. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor joined.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- The holdings and implications of Williams v. Illinois (Jeffrey Fisher, June 20, 2012)
- Argument recap: A solidifying Confrontation Clause majority (Tom Goldstein, December 12, 2011)
- Argument preview: Closer to the margins of the Confrontation Clause? (Tom Goldstein, December 5, 2011)
- Two more cases granted (Lyle Denniston, June 28, 2011)
Briefs and Documents
Merits briefs for the Petitioner
Amicus briefs in Support of the Petitioner
- Brief for the California Public Defenders Association et al.
- Brief for the Innocence Network
- Brief for Richard D. Friedman
- Brief for Public Defender Service for the “District of Columbia and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Merits briefs for the Respondent
Amicus briefs in support of the Respondent
- Brief for the United States”
- Brief for National District Attorneys Association et al,
- Brief for the New York County District Attorney’s Office and the New York County Office of the Chief Medical Examiner
- Brief for Ohio et al.
Certiorari-stage documents
- Opinion below (Supreme Court of Illinois)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition
- Petitioner's reply
Merits briefs for the Petitioner
Amicus briefs in Support of the Petitioner
- Brief for the California Public Defenders Association et al.
- Brief for the Innocence Network
- Brief for Richard D. Friedman
- Brief for Public Defender Service for the “District of Columbia and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Merits briefs for the Respondent
Amicus briefs in support of the Respondent
- Brief for the United States”
- Brief for National District Attorneys Association et al,
- Brief for the New York County District Attorney’s Office and the New York County Office of the Chief Medical Examiner
- Brief for Ohio et al.
[##CERT-STAGE##]