In State v. Forte, 360 N.C. 427, 629 S.E.2d 137, cert. denied, U.S., 127 S. Ct. 557, 166 L. Ed. 2d. 413 (2006), the court admitted lab reports providing an analysis of bodily fluids. Agent Spittle, who wrote the reports, "received samples of blood and bodily fluids sent to the laboratory for analysis, examined the samples and identify the fluids, and then referred the material to other investigators in the laboratory for further analysis." Id. at 433, 629 S.E.2d at 142. Upon admitting the foregoing reports at trial, the court neither determined that Agent Spittle was unavailable to testify, nor that the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine Agent Spittle. However, the Court reasoned that the reports were "not testimonial" in nature, because the reports "contained the results of Agent Spittle's objective analysis of the evidence, along with routine chain of custody information, and do not bear witness against defendant." Id. at 435, 629 S.E.2d at 143. The reports were "neutral, having the power to exonerate as well as convict." Id. The Court in Forte concluded that the trial court did not violate the defendant's right to confrontation.