ATF Weapons "Trace" Reports are Not Testimonial under Crawford.

State v. Jackson, Minn.Ct.App., 4/28/2009.  Three masked men, one of whom sported a shotgun, stormed the rear door of the Beehive Tavern shouting, "This is a stick up!".  Well, sort of.  The proprietor seemed to know that the guys were coming; he got off seven rounds from his handgun and that was that.  The three men beat a hasty retreat.  Police arrived and shortly thereafter found Mr. Jackson and a shotgun in a nearby alley.

The state introduced a "trace" report from the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms.  This report identified the original purchaser of the shotgun; it also identified "recovery information", which stated that the shotgun had been recovered from Mr. Jackson in the alley near the Beehive Tavern on the date of the robbery. 

On appeal, Mr. Jackson argued that admission of this report violated his right of confrontation under Crawford.  The appellate court disagreed, for several reasons.  First, the report was not created for litigation but is a record that is maintained in the ordinary course of business. (The appellate court makes the rather incredulous statement that ATF "did not expect the firearm-trace report would be used prosecutorially.")   Second, it may qualify under the business records exception, although this is likely not enough to satisfy Crawford.  See State v. Johnson, 756 N.W. 2d 883 (Minn.Ct.App. 2008).  Along the way, the appellate court distinguished State v. Caulfield, 722 N.W.2d 304 (Minn. 2006) (BCA report on identification of narcotic is testimonial); and State v. Weaver, 733 N.W.2d 793 (Minn.Ct.App. 2007) (hospital lab report prepared as part of an autopsy is testimonial).  In both of those cases, the report was prepared for the purpose of prosecuting the defendants.