hearsay

Substitute expert testimony in North Carolina criminal cases continues to develop, as evidence in the May 2026 Court of Appeals decision in State v. Phillips. A substitute expert may testify when the opinion comes from evidence the expert can independently review, such as photographs of visible injuries. The Confrontation Clause problem may be subject to review when the Rule 702 opinion depends on the truth of what an absent examiner recorded, measured, observed, charted, tested, or concluded.

That distinction matters in criminal defense because expert testimony can sound scientific even when it rests on human assumptions that were never tested in court. A jury may hear the word “independent” and assume the witness did the work. Phillips reminds lawyers, judges, and anyone facing criminal charges that the real question is not whether the witness has credentials. The real question may involve what the opinion is based on.

TL;DR | Substitute Expert Testimony

Hearsay, Tips, and Confidential Informant Evidence in trafficking charges in North Carolina can be the basis for the issuance of a search warrant and further investigation into alleged criminal activity.

Courts, prosecutors, and Charlotte criminal lawyers alike carefully review such materials, as may be made part of a Motion for Discovery, due to the potential impact and/or suppression of evidence seized pursuant to a search.

In the event a Search Warrant is predicated on information provided by a confidential informant, tip, hearsay, or another out-of-court statement, the reliability, and veracity of information provided may, in appropriate circumstances, serve as a basis for either a Motion to Suppress and a Motion of Dismiss, depending on the nature, level, and extent of constitutional violations.

Articles Tagged with hearsay

Substitute Expert Testimony in North Carolina | State v. Phillips 2026

TL;DR | Substitute Expert Testimony

Trafficking Heroin – Confidential Informant Tip Hearsay – North Carolina v. Patricia Camillo Palacios