Bowman

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS OPINION IS DEPUBLISHED UPON GRANTING OF PETITION FOR REVIEW. THE OPINION APPEARS BELOW WITH A GRAY BACKGROUND.]

In this appeal, we will address the following question: Does the United States Supreme Court's determination in the recent case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (2009) 557 U.S. [ 174 L.Ed.2d 314 , 129 S.Ct. 2527 ] ( Melendez-Diaz ), alter the California rule established in People v. Geier (2007) 41 Cal.4th 555 , 596-607 [ 61 Cal.Rptr.3d 580 , 161 P.3d 104 ] ( Geier ), that an in-court witness may rely on laboratory notes and reports, even if prepared by a different individual, to support the witness's expert opinion? Melendez-Diaz held that the admission of a written document to establish laboratory results violates the Sixth Amendment. ( Melendez-Diaz, supra , 557 U.S. at p. [ 129 S.Ct. at p. 2532 ].) We will hold that Melendez-Diaz does not abrogate the holding in Geier .

As relevant to this appeal, police officers stopped defendant on June 6, 2008, for traffic infractions. Searching defendant's car, the officers found marijuana, a digital scale, a police scanner, and a crystalline substance that appeared to be methamphetamine. A jury found…