Opinion ID: 1848209
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: was the defendant denied due process because of the state's failure to preserve certain exculpatory evidence and perform blood tests on fluid samples?

Text: Johnston's motion for production of documents and tangible evidence was filed on April 14, 1978, almost a month after the date of the alleged rape. Among other things, Johnston asked the State to produce: 11. Any exculpatory matter which in any way tends to absolve the Defendant of the crime with which he is charged which is in the possession or under the control of the State of Mississippi. 12. The results of any blood tests and blood type comparisons made by, for or on behalf of the State of Mississippi of the blood type of the Defendant, with any semen, skin scrapings or other matter taken from the body of the Prosecutrix. The State, not having conducted any blood tests and blood type comparisons of the defendant's blood type with semen samples taken from the body of the prosecutrix, did not have any results of any blood tests and blood type comparisons to produce under the general request of the motion. Neither did it have any exculpatory matter which in any way tends to absolve the Defendant of the crime, to produce in accordance with the calls of the motion. Finally, on June 29, 1978, more than three months after the semen samples and vaginal fluid had been taken from the body of the prosecutrix, the defendant made a motion ore tenus that the contents of the rape package be delivered to him so that tests could be conducted. That same day the court ordered the state to produce these items. The samples proved to be no longer viable because the defendant had waited too long in requesting the State to produce them. Defendant's own witness, Dr. Warren Bell, director of laboratories and Chairman of the Department at the University Medical Center, testified that a reliable test can only be performed on such samples from one week to one month after they are taken, that determining the blood type from the semen samples, even if the tests are made between one week and one month after taking them, is about 80% reliable, and that when semen and vaginal fluid are mixed in the samples taken, the reliability is only about 50%. The defendant's claim, that the rape package was potentially exculpatory evidence and should have been turned over to him on the basis of his general request, or that the tests on the semen samples to determine the blood type should have been performed by the City or State itself, is without merit. His reliance on United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 96 S.Ct. 2392, 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976), and Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978), is misplaced. Agurs and Scott are clearly distinguishable on the facts and do not in any way support the defendant's contentions. This Court, in Scott v. State, supra , said: In Agurs the Court stated, the mere possibility that an item of undisclosed information might have helped the defense, or might have affected the outcome of the trial, does not establish materiality in the constitutional sense.' 359 So.2d at 1362. As stated in both Agurs and Scott, the mere possibility that an item of undisclosed information might have helped the defense, or might have affected the outcome of the trial, does not establish `materiality' so as to require production on a general request. It is argued by the defendant that the State did not refrigerate these samples and therefore destroyed them by this act of omission. The test to be made is whether the state acted in good faith and followed normal operating procedures. William Ates, the serologist for the Jackson Police Department for 14 years, was called as a witness by the defendant and testified that the standard and normal procedure was to preserve rape packages at room temperature and that this was done in this case.