Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), is a significant 6th Amendment Confrontation Clause case decided by the United States Supreme Court.

On June 23, 2011, the Supreme Court considered the issue whether a defendant's Confrontation Clause rights extend to a non-testifying laboratory analyst whose supervisor testifies as to test results that the analyst transcribed from a machine.

At his trial, the prosecution presented a lab report indicating that his blood-alcohol levels were elevated.

In a 5 to 4 decision in favor of Bullcoming, Justice Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion for the Court.

[2] The US Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment gives a criminal defendant the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him," and that "surrogate testimony" is not good enough.