skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 31802 Find in a Library
Title: RIGHT TO INDEPENDENT TESTING - A NEW HITCH IN THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE DOCTRINE
Journal: COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW  Volume:75  Issue:7  Dated:(NOVEMBER 1975)  Pages:13551380
Author(s): J H NEWMAN
Corporate Author: Columbia University
School of Law
United States of America
Date Published: 1975
Page Count: 26
Sponsoring Agency: Columbia University
New York, NY 10027
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: INVESTIGATION OF THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF PROSECUTION'S DUTY TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE WHICH EXAMINES THE POLICIES AND COMPETING DOCTRINES SUPPORTING OR LIMITING A DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO INDEPENDENT TESTING OF EVIDENCE.
Abstract: THE USE OF THE 'MATERIALITY OF EVIDENCE' AND 'GOOD FAITH/ BAD FAITH' TESTS OF DUE PROCESS (USED IN NOTES DESTRUCTION AND EVIDENCE SUPPRESSION CASES) IN DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE CASES IS CONSIDERED AND FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE. ALTERNATIVE DUE PROCESS MODELS ARE THEN CONSIDERED - THE PROMULGATION OF SYSTEMATIC ROLES FOR THE PRESERVATION OF 'ALL' DISCOVERABLE EVIDENCE (UNITED STATES V. BRYANT, 1971), AND REQUIRING THAT EVIDENCE, FROM A PARTICULAR TEST, FAVORABLE TO THE ISSUE OF GUILT OR INNOCENCE BE PRESERVED AND DISCLOSED (PEOPLE V. HITCH, 1974). THE AUTHOR MAINTAINS THAT WHILE HITCH IS WELL SUITED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF DETAILED DIRECTIONS IN SPECIFIC, RECURRENT PROBLEMS, CASES, OR AREAS, IT IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF WORKABLE GENERAL GUIDELINES GOVERNING EVIDENCE PRESERVATION IN NON RECURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. FOR THESE CASES, ADHERENCE TO THE PROCEDURE SUGGESTED IN LIMITED STATES V. HEIDEN (1974) IS RECOMMENDED. IN HEIDEN, THE NINTH CIRCUIT HELD THAT THE PROSECUTION MUST PETITION THE COURT AND NOTIFY THE DEFENSE OF ITS INTENTIONS BEFORE ANY DISPOSITION, DESTRUCTION, OR TESTING OF EVIDENCE OCCURS. IN THIS WAY, THE DEFENDANT WOULD BE GIVEN TIME TO EXERCISE HIS RIGHTS OF ACCESS FOR TESTING AND EVALUATION.
Index Term(s): Due process model; Evidence identification; Evidence preservation; Judicial decisions; Prosecution; Rights of the accused; Testing and measurement
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=31802

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.