Opinion ID: 6627
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Friday's PSI

Text: 40 During the testimony of government witness/co-conspirator Douglas Friday, defendants requested that the government produce Friday's presentence investigation report pursuant to the Jencks Act. 11 Defendants also argue that the PSI version of events was potentially exculpatory because of its impeachment value, and thus also should have been turned over under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 86, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 1196, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). 41 The Fifth Circuit has held that a PSI is not an Jencks Act statement. United States v. Jackson, 978 F.2d 903, 909 (5th Cir.1992). cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 2429, 124 L.Ed.2d 649 (1993). Even if Friday had adopted his PSI by failing to object to it, such adoption is very different from the adoption required to make the report Friday's own statement under the Jencks Act. See Jackson, 978 F.2d at 909. With regard to the defendants' Brady request, the trial court examined the PSI version of events and found that it did not contain any material differences from Friday's testimony and therefore would not be useful for impeachment, or favorable to the defense under Brady. The district court thus fulfilled its duty and afforded the defendants all the rights to which they were entitled. See Jackson, 978 F.2d at 909. We find no reversible error.