Opinion ID: 628408
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Government's Failure to Produce Evidence

Text: 10 Tribble claims that he was denied a fair trial because the government failed to provide him with allegedly exculpatory material despite the fact that this evidence had been subpoenaed. Tribble had sought: (1) recreation department and labor passes for April, May, and June, 1991, (2) inmate typewriter check-out records for March through June, 1991, (3) the telephone sign up sheets for Waushara and Sauk Unit inmate telephones, and (4) the special housing unit's bed book or cell assignment log. Tr. (7/30/92) at 9. At the final hearing before Judge Shabaz, the government explained that the first three items were destroyed pursuant to standard procedure. Specifically, the recreational and labor passes and the telephone sign-up sheets are kept for only 30 days, and the typewriter check-out records are kept for only six months. As for the cell assignment log, the government represented to the court that it would be available at trial. Id. Tribble did not argue that his rights had been violated by the government's destruction of the first three items, and therefore we will reverse only upon a showing of plain error. Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(b). 1 11 There is certainly no plain error with respect to items 1, 3, and 4. Items 1 and 3 are routinely destroyed after 30 days. The victims were first alerted to the possibility that they had been defrauded in late June of 1991. By the time it became clear that Tribble was the culprit, it is almost certain that the relevant records had been destroyed. Thus, with respect to items 1 and 3, the government was not grossly negligent for destroying them. United States v. Morrison, 518 F.Supp. 917, 919 (S.D.N.Y.1981). As for item 4, the cell assignment log, apparently it was available, but Tribble chose not to use it. 12 We now turn to item 2, the typewriter check-out records. Tribble claims that these records would have revealed that he did not type the documents that were sent to the victims. Because these records are kept for six months, it is possible that before these materials were destroyed, the government should have been aware that this material might be relevant to Tribble's defense. We nevertheless find no plain error. 13 In order for us to find plain error, we must conclude that the error probably changed the outcome of the trial. United States v. Douglas, 818 F.2d 1317, 1320 (7th Cir.1987). In this case, we do not believe that the absence of the typewriter check-out records probably changed the outcome of the trial. It is possible that Tribble had someone else check out the typewriter and perhaps type the documents for him. It is unlikely that the typewriter checkout records would have been enough to sway the jury, especially in light of all the other evidence of Tribble's guilt, which was extensive. 2 Thus, we find no plain error with respect to item 2. 14 We reject Tribble's claim that he was denied a fair trial because the government failed to produce these documents.