Opinion ID: 1179411
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the missing swabs

Text: While I agree with much of the majority's analysis concerning the missing swabs, I cannot concur that the state did not deprive Fain of due process by failing to preserve them. In my view, the jury should have been instructed as requested by Fain. Fain's requested instruction read as follows: If you find from the evidence before you that the state or any agent of the state allowed material evidence to be destroyed, then you may infer that such evidence would have been against the interests of the state in seeking conviction. This instruction was based on State v. Willits, 96 Ariz. 184, 393 P.2d 274 (1964) and State v. Hunter, 136 Ariz. 45, 664 P.2d 195 (1983). It focuses on evidence that the state has allowed to be destroyed. It fits the circumstances in this case and would leave to the jury the question of whether the state allowed the evidence to be destroyed and, if so, whether the missing evidence would affect the verdict of the jury.