I was stunned to learn that, until the recent Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts decision from the Supreme Court, that the testimony from a forensic expert could not be cross-examined in many states. So, as the author I am going to link to below has pointed out many times, questionable evidence has been able to be admitted, as long as an "expert" has verified it, and the defense cannot question the validity of said evidence.
Fortunately, in the Melendez-Diaz, case, that limitation has been overturned.
However, there is a new case, Briscoe, et al., v. Virginia, which may undo the protections gained in the Melendez-Diaz case. And Sonia Sotamayor may be the swing vote.
Defense attorneys and critics of the forensics system were celebratory, but they might want to check next term's docket. Just before it recessed, the Court agreed to hear a case from Virginia with very similar issues at stake. The unusual move has some Court watchers speculating that the minority in Melendez-Diaz may see former prosecutor and new Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor as an ally. Her vote could give them a majority for a reversal or a significant limitation of last term's ruling.
Full article
Joe Biden told police and prosecutors, "As you do your job, know that Judge Sotomayor has your back as well. And throughout this nominating process, I know you’ll have her back."
Anyone who believes in defendants rights, especially those gained when it comes to forensic experts being immune from cross-examination, should be wary of Sotomayor, until she prove herself to be an advocate of the rights of the accused, and not the state.