The People of the State of New York, Respondent v. Michael Rawlins, Appellant; the People of the State of New York…

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions in People v. Rawlins and People v. Meekins. It held that the fingerprint comparison reports in Rawlins were testimonial but their admission was harmless error, while the DNA testing reports in Meekins were nontestimonial business records. The Court emphasized a fact‑intensive, context‑specific analysis under Crawford and Davis. Justice Read, in a concurring opinion, disagreed with the majority's finding that fingerprint reports were testimonial, arguing that both types of forensic reports are nontestimonial.