In your Lehigh County Criminal case, your first step is a preliminary hearing. This hearing is vital to your defense. At this hearing, the Commonwealth must present a prima facie case that the charges apply. So, who must testify at the preliminary hearing?
First, a criminal defendant has a right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him pursuant to the United States Constitution, the Pennsylvania Constitution; and the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The Pennsylvania Constitution provides that "in all criminal prosecutions" the accused has a right to meet the witnesses against him -- "face to face". Pa. Const. Art. 1 § 9. This right necessarily includes the right to confront witnesses and explore fully their testimony through cross-examination. A preliminary hearing is an adversarial proceeding which is a critical stage in a criminal prosecution. It is not a sidebar conference at which offers of proof are made. Thus, the Pennsylvania Constitution mandates a criminal defendant's right to confrontation and cross-examination at the preliminary hearing. In this case, Buchanan was denied the right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him. Commonwealth ex rel. Buchanan v. Verbonitz, 525 Pa. 413, 419 (Pa. 1990)
The Commonwealth, in trying to get hearsay in at a preliminary hearing, will cite two cases -- Branch and Rick. In Branch, a police officer’s testimony regarding a witness’ statement was admissible at the preliminary hearing when the witness would be available at trial and other non-hearsay evidence was presented at the hearing. Commonwealth v. Branch, 292 Pa.Super 425, 437 A.2d 748 (1981). But note, it is up to your Lehigh County criminal lawyer to get on the record the basis for why and how the Commonwealth knows that a witness would be available for trial. Also, it is extremely important to note that some cases require a victim's statement in certain crimes. The Commonwealth, under Branch, must have some non-hearsay evidence (which is impossible sometimes when they need a victim's allegations to prove an element of the crime).
In Rick, the court ruled that along with evidence that the defendant drove his car into a tree, a hearsay lab report could be admitted to show the defendant’s blood alcohol level. Commonwealth v. Rick, 366 A.2d 302 (Pa. Super. 1976). This case primarily revolves around DUI cases, where the court has decided that the analyst/lab technician/doctor who wrote the report does not have to come in at a preliminary hearing and testify.