This COURT's 2OO4 dECiSiON iN CRAWfORd v. WAshingtOn, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) clEARly ESTAblishEd thAT, puRSUANT to thE CONFRONtATiON ClAUSE of THE SiXth AMENdMENT to the UNitEd StAtE Constitution, the tEstimoniAl STATEMENTS of A dEClARANT WhO is Not pRESENT fOR fOR tRiAl OR EXpEXT tESTiMONiAl REPORT MAY bE AdmiTtEd iNtO EVidENCE fOR thE puRpOSE of pRovINg tHE tRUth of tHE MATTER ASSERtEd [ONY] if thE dEClARANT is UNAVAILABTE ANd thE dEfEN dANT hAS hAd A PRiOR OPPORTUNity tO CROSS-EXAMINE thE dECLARANT.

FiVE YEARS lAtER, iN MELENDEZ- DiAZ V. MASSAChUSSEHS, 557 4.S. 305 (2009) this CouRT Explicitly REjECtEd thE clAim thAt thE REpORTs ANd STAtEMENTs of foRENSIC SCiENTiSTS ARE somehoW ExceptEd from CRAWfORd'S UNEQUIVOCAL PROCEDURA/ RULE. ANd iN Bullcomning v NEw MExice 564 U.S. 6HT (2OlL), A MAjORITy of thiS COURT MADE CLEAR thAT CRAWfORD's pROCEDURAl RU/E iS. NOT SATiSfied by pRoviding dEfENdANT AN oppORtUNity to A foRENSie sEiENtiSt About ANOthER CROSS-EXAMiNE ONE fORENSIC SCiENTiSt's out-of-COURT tESTIMONIAl REPORT ANd stAfEMENts.

SINCE thE SupREmE COURT 2004 dEciSiON iN CeftEStimoNiAl sStAtEmENts of witNEsSES AbsENt from FRiAL [mAy bE] AdmiEd [ONy] WhERE thE dEClARANT is UNAVAIAbE, ANd [ONly] WhERE tE dEfENDANT hAS hAd A PRIOR OPPORTUNiTy to CROSS-EXAMiNE." 541 U.S. At 59 (Emphasis) Added). DESpitE this cleARly EstablishEd RulE, thE Fifth CiRcuit CouET of AppEAls REgARdiNg EN BANC, tHE PANE/ iN tHIS CASE -RElYiNg ON

Whether the testimonial statements of witnesses about forensic testing may be admitted only where the declarant is unavailable, and only where the defendant has had a prior opportunity to cross-examine