Opinion ID: 71274
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Prejudice—Misrepresentations and Polygraph

Text: Tokars argues that the government failed to produce the results of two polygraph exams administered to Lawrence. The government did release the Secret Service polygraph to the defendants.11 At trial, the district court found that there was no 11 Tokars contends that the admission of the Secret Service polygraph of Lawrence was error. Pursuant to United States v. Piccinonna, 885 F.2d 1529, 1536 (11th Cir.1989) (en banc), polygraph evidence may be admitted to impeach or corroborate testimony of a witness at trial within the court's discretion, so long as the opposing party has adequate notice of the evidence and an opportunity to secure its own polygraph. During his opening statement, Tokars claimed that his relationship with Lawrence was that of a businessman investing in a rising entrepreneur. Tokars acknowledged the existence of the polygraph test and in fact consented to the test. The polygraph was not introduced to prove that Lawrence told the Secret Service the truth, but to prove that Lawrence had been deceptive and that Brady12 or Giglio13 material in the results of the polygraph, which was administered to Lawrence to enable him to enter the Witness Protection Program. Counsel for Tokars then asked for the questions that were asked of Lawrence, and the government disclosed these two questions: Do you have any specific plans to locate or harm another witness in the program? Do you have any specific plans to intimidate or threaten another witness in the program? R64-2561. In its brief, the government concedes that one could reasonably infer from its disclosure of only two questions that in fact only two questions were asked. On cross-examination, Lawrence indicated that he was asked six or seven questions and in response to questions gave the impression that he was polygraphed regarding the truthfulness of his testimony about Tokars. Tokars charged that Lawrence was lying about the number of questions but then discovered that there were in fact more than two questions. The district court ordered the government to produce the entire list of questions. The court concluded that it had no opinion as to whether Lawrence had intentionally lied; however, the court expressed concern over the matter of giving the jury the impression that Lawrence had been polygraphed regarding his testimony about Tokars. The district court resolved the issue by allowing the government, over objection, to read a statement to the jury Tokars was so informed. Thus, we see no error in the admission of the polygraph exam. However, even assuming that the admission was erroneous, any error was harmless. 12 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). 13 Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972). confirming that Lawrence was given a polygraph exam before entering the Witness Protection Program, but which stated that he was never asked any questions regarding whether his testimony at trial was or would be truthful.14 We are persuaded that the district court corrected any possible error by allowing the government to inform the jury that Lawrence was not questioned during the polygraph examination about his testimony regarding Tokars.15