May an autopsy report be admitted into evidence when the author of that report is not available to be cross-examined during trial?

That was the question a full complement of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court waded into for roughly an hour the morning of Sept. 12. The discussion focused on whether allowing in the autopsy report without its author present at trial violated the confrontation clause, or if it is permissible under the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence regarding expert testimony.

Assistant Philadelphia District Attorney Anthony Carissimi told the justices the report can be allowed in as the basis for the testifying medical examiner's observations, rather than as evidence of the truth. A proper jury instruction, Carissimi said, could make it clear that the information should be evaluated only as support for the observations.