Case ID: so2d_391/html/1119-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. LEMMON, Justice, DENNIS, Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Louisiana v. Johnny W. ROBBINS.
    No. 67487.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 15, 1980.
    Rehearing Denied Dec. 16, 1980.
    Curtis W. Cary, Jack, Jack, Cary & Cary, Shreveport, for defendant-appellant.
    William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Paul Car-mouche, Dist. Atty., Woodrow B. Nesbitt, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

LEMMON, J., concurs and assigns reasons.

DENNIS, J., dissents and assigns reasons and would grant a rehearing.

LEMMON, Justice,

concurring.

When the defense requests specific evidence which may be exculpatory and there is a substantial basis for claiming materiality, the prosecution must respond either by furnishing the information or submitting the evidence to the trial court for in camera inspection. United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 106, 96 S.Ct. 2392, 2398, 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976).

Here, since the defense did not ask for an in camera inspection of the victim’s statement after her testimony and did not apply for a new trial to establish that the statement had any exculpatory value, there is no showing of prejudice.

DENNIS, Justice,

dissenting.

I would find merit in Assignment of Error Number Five. The remarks made by the state during rebuttal argument were improper and an invitation for the jurors to disregard their sworn oaths.