RICHMOND -- A Virginia Senate subcommittee agreed Wednesday on draft legislation that could help the state's court system deal with the effects of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision involving the use of forensic evidence in criminal trials.

The June Supreme Court decision -- Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts -- is forcing Virginia to take steps to help ensure that forensic analysts can be available to testify in cases involving scientific evidence. The General Assembly will convene a special session Aug. 19 to at least make partial fixes to the problem.

Draft legislation that was fine-tuned by a Senate Courts of Justice subcommittee Wednesday would require prosecutors to provide notice of their intent to introduce scientific evidence 28 days before a case goes to trial. A defendant would have 14 days to decide whether to require the scientist to testify.

Prosecutors and lawmakers from around the state have warned that the Melendez-Diaz decision could lead to widespread dismissals of drug and drunken-driving cases because lab technicians would not be available to testify. Lynchburg Commonwealth's Attorney Michael Doucette told the Senate subcommittee Wednesday that defense lawyers already are taking advantage of the decision to get cases dismissed. Defense lawyers typically wouldn't want to summon the analysts, he said.

"They're doing this because they can," Doucette said. "They're doing it because they can clog up the system."

In the Melendez-Diaz case, the Supreme Court ruled that laboratory evidence is testimonial and that scientists who conduct the testing must be available for cross-examination by the defense. Existing Virginia law puts the burden on defendants to subpoena scientists in order to challenge lab reports.

The draft bill put together Wednesday also contains provisions that would allow prosecutors to seek a continuance if the scientist is not available on the trial date.

The draft legislation was crafted by a working group that includes lawyers from the offices of Gov. Tim Kaine and Attorney General Bill Mims. A House of Delegates subcommittee also has been working on bills for the special session.

The Supreme Court ruling already has led to a dramatic increase in the amount of time state scientists are spending in courts, lawmakers learned last week. Gail Jaspen, the chief deputy director of the Department of Forensic Science, told a Senate committee last week that lab analysts received 925 subpoenas to testify in July after receiving only 43 in the same month last year.

Lawmakers acknowledge they must take other measures to ensure that scientists are available to testify, such as adding personnel and expanding the use of videoconference technology. But the General Assembly likely won't address those needs until it meets for its regular session this winter.