# Perkins v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · April 30, 2004 · 897 So. 2d 457

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936083

## Case

- **Full name:** James Perkins v. State of Alabama.
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
- **Decided:** April 30, 2004
- **Citations:** 897 So. 2d 457; 2004 WL 923506
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Shaw
- **Judges:** Shaw, Wise
- **Cited by:** 41 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936083

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that an autopsy report is non-testimonial in nature and, classified as a business record, it “bear[s] the earmark of reliability and probability or trustworthiness”
- applying Roberts and concluding that an autopsy report was admissible under the business records exception and, as within a firmly rooted exception, satisfied the Confrontation Clause
- noting that business records "bear the earmark of reliability or probability of trustworthiness," which "satisfies the core value of the Confrontation Clause"
- finding an autopsy report not to be testimonial, as it had been made in the ordinary course of business

## Opinion text

I concur fully in Parts I and III of the majority's opinion. I concur in the result in Part II of the opinion because I agree that any error in the admission of the autopsy report was harmless. See my writing in Smith v. State , [Ms. CR-02-1218, April 30, 2004] ___ So.2d ___ (Ala.Crim.App. 2004). *Page 1011

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936083. Public record. Not legal advice.