Opinion ID: 2615930
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Admission of Federal Court Transcript

Text: Defendants next argue it was error to admit and consider the transcript of a suppression hearing held before the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, thus tainting the suppression hearing and denying the defendants' right to due process of law. It would appear defendants are correct in their contention that it was error to admit the former testimony. K.S.A. 60-460( c )(2) requires unavailability of the declarant and the situation at bar does not indicate the witnesses were unavailable to testify at trial. In fact, each was present and was called by defense counsel to be cross-examined. We hold it was error for the trial court to allow the testimony to be admitted; however, we cannot say defendants were denied their right to due process. No prejudicial error was shown.