A video recorded a confidential informant purchasing suspected methamphetamine from David Lee Gilmore, but the recording had no discernible audio and the informant later died. The Court of Appeals of Georgia held that the video contained testimonial nonverbal statements barred by the Confrontation Clause. The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed. It held that the recording depicted the informant’s conduct, not a nonverbal statement, and that conduct did not imply hearsay merely because it was recorded during an investigation. The Confrontation Clause therefore did not bar admission of the video. The Court remanded for further proceedings and all participating Justices concurred.