Whether a Confrontation Clause violation (allowing an expert witness to testify by video) was harmless error; People v Mass; Coy v Iowa; MCR 6.006(C); Admissibility of an expert’s report; MCR 6.202; Melendez-Diaz v Massachusetts

On remand, the court held that the Confrontation Clause violation in this case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. It also concluded that the violation of MCR 6.006(C) was susceptible to harmless-error review, that the standard for that review in this case was the same as for preserved, nonconstitutional error, and the violation was harmless. Defendant was convicted of CSC I. In a prior appeal, the court affirmed. However, the Supreme Court reversed on two issues related to an expert’s (C) testimony and remanded for a harmless error analysis. On remand, the court found the testimonial error was harmless and again affirmed. “Because defendant never filed a written objection to prosecutor’s notice of intent to use [C’s] report as evidence at trial, the report was admissible. Defendant waived his right to confront” C about his report. As such, the report was part of the remaining evidence, and to the extent C “merely testified to matters that were in his report, that testimony was cumulative.” The court then concluded that the violation of MCR 6.006(C) was susceptible to harmless-error review, that MCL 769.26 provided the standard for determining whether the error was harmless, and that the error was harmless.