Document: 365 U.S. 85 81 S.Ct. 421 5 L.Ed.2d 428 Alvin R. CAMPBELL, Arnold S. Campbell and Donald Lester, Petitioners,v.UNITED STATES. No. 53. Argued Dec. 6, 1960. Decided Jan. 23, 1961. Messrs. Melvin Louison, Taunton, Mass., Lawrence F. O'Donnell, Boston, for petitioners. Mr. Roger G. Connor, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 After a government witness testifies on direct examination in federal criminal prosecution trial court is required, under so-called Jencks Act,1 motion defendant, to order United States produce, impeachment purposes, defined pretrial statements witness, or parts such as determined subsection (c), which relate subject matter his testimony are possession States. The conviction petitioners District Court Massachusetts bank robbery violation 18 U.S.C. § 2113, U.S.C.A. was sustained by Appeals First Circuit. Cir., 269 F.2d 688. During ordered Government produce document described cross-examination one its witnesses terms satisfy definition 'statement' Act. denied having document. It did, however, admit an Interview Report interview FBI agent with that but contended this report fell outside statute. judge held inquiry without jury present, at conclusion he refused deliver petitioners, also their strike witness. procedure raises questions important administration Act, we granted certiorari limited review those questions. 362 909, 80 663, 4 618. 2 Dominic Staula, depositor who time robbery. On identified petitioner Lester robbers. When asked whether made any agents before trial, said Federal Bureau Investigation interviewed him during week following wrote down statement. His recollection what occurred not entirely clear,2 ruled had statement satisfying requirements Act it. Assistant Attorney presenting Government's case stated no paper described. He further only within statute, typed Report3 Special Agent Toomey prepared transcribed after unknown Assistant. petitioners' counsel it inspection. To court's question possessed 'any copied way would reflect substantially adopted 3 `----------- 'Property FBI.—This loaned you FBI, neither nor contents be distributed agency loaned. Sex................................ Male. 6 Race............................... Negro. 7 Age................................ Approximately 30 years. 8 Height............................. 5' 10". 9 Weight............................. 165 pounds. 10 Complexion......................... Very dark. 11 Build.............................. Slender. 12 Face............................... Round. 13 Clothing........................... Dark blue suit. 14 ................................... Blue snap brim hat. 15 White shirt. 16 'Mr. Staula did observe third man bank— 17 'It know type gun carried these two individuals whom observed believed they could have been 45 Caliber automatics. taking look individual wearing suit faced wall previously further. 19 'He stood face approximately minutes robbers other people were standing either side walk into vault. does recall issued enter vault directed 20 robbers, closed door some effect locked inside should leave stayed there until opened Sergeant Ruane Canton, Massachusetts, Police Department.' 21 'Interview File #91—952, July 19, 1957, John Toomey, Jr., bjp.' statement,' replied 'No, your Honor, don't.' 'the (has) notes taken interviewed,' answered, 'I do them my I ever existed.' 22 limits access defendants papers fit Act's 'statements' has testified, Palermo v. States, 360 343, 79 1217, 1287. However, statute requires shall, called testified examination, 'statements.' extent, legislative history makes clear, 'reaffirms' our holding 353 657, 77 1007, 1103, defendant entitled, relevant competent touching events activities trial. S.Rep. 981, 85th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 3. And see H.R.Rep. 700, pp. 3—4. command thus designed fair just justice, goal judiciary special guardian. 23 overnight recess conducted present take hear argument counsel. Plainly enough proper, even proceeding circumstances. Determination from mere inspection Report, help extrinsic evidence. situation different governed admits submits judge's camera delete contends similar Palermo, where 'statement.' We approved out presence assist reaching determination production paper. said, pages 354—355, page 1226, function decide, light circumstances each case, what, if any, evidence itself may must offered prove nature statement.' 24 In aid required answer bearing motions: 25 Did write told interview? If so, give 'to read over, make sure right,' sign it? 26 Was described, copy paper? ruled, producible (e)(1). 'Statements' himself set They include written another 'signed otherwise approved' 'made witness.' True, bear Staula's signature think sign' original essential. See Bergman 253 933, 935, note 1; Tomaiolo, 280 411, 413. 27 became 28 event, over Report? (e)(1) although related Or verbatim recital oral recorded contemporaneously? established (e)(2). 351—352, 1224. 29 obvious call who, parties agreed, readily available. Defense suggested explain got * (Interview Report),' because easily say done writing.' position appreciate significance Toomey's possible producibility itself. Consistent admonition 354, 'it indeed defeat design (to limit defense papers) hold argue allowed them,' permitted inspect From own inspection, aware might turn defense. resembles indicated it, copy, contemporaneously Nevertheless, subpoena 'their witness' support motions, summon testify, require him. ruling erroneous. being adversary controlled rules governing allocation between burdens proof persuasion. simply necessary discharge responsibility laid upon enforce so much positions duty come forward making determination. These considerations alone suggest emphasis burden misplaced. says nothing producing Rather implies affirmatively administer can best secure available decide directly opposed interests protected statute—the interest safeguarding disclosure, accused produced. 31 clearly Not advantage knowing employ presumably knew, ascertain him, facts about interview. addition consideration '* shall win justice done, *.' Berger 295 78, 88, 55 629, 633, L.Ed. 1314, ordinary rule, based fairness, place litigant establishing peculiarly knowledge adversary. New York, N.H. & H.R. Co., 355 253, 256, 78 212, 214, 247, 5. Moreover, shown prima facie entitlement statement, and, least, case. Cf. Costello, 145 F.Supp. 892, 894—895, 13. Since not, be, determine, saddled unfairly severe role groping dark questioning bound answers. As latitude entitled them. 32 Instead calling error relying supply information sought. Over objection 'recorded 'If now reads loses purposes impeachment,' familiar never seen report. then Toomey?' replied, 'That's up story is.' 'There things turned around.' elicited delivery testimony. 33 Reliance controverted improper almost very use cross-examining Under allow 'in see' since inconsistent congressional purpose papers. Similarly, necessarily inhered hazard self-interest statutory requiring For example, states unable description This sharp contrast positive identification examination. Experienced judges lawyers will understand value But deprived opportunity obviously self-serving declarations accurately record agent. 34 failure foreclosed proper destroyed, Thus, producible, arisen decision (d) striking destruction regarded equivalent noncompliance subsection. motives bad faith regarded. contend regard affords us construction (d). yet existed, destruction, benefit least 35 conclude errors conduct redetermination statements, vacate new right fully remand direction consistent opinion. Shotwell Mfg. 233, 245, 234. supplement findings final judgment concludes reaffirm former rulings. preserve seek appellate augmented record. hand, testimony, accord 36 therefore vacated remanded proceedings ordered. 37 Judgment 38 FRANKFURTER, CLARK, HARLAN WHITTAKER join, dissenting part concurring result part. 39 What case? course Bank Robbery three men committing alleged offense. Upon cross-examination, disclosed that, occasion local police headquarters, agents. signed 'a piece saying bank.' basis requested man' 3500, relates testified.' request ground 'laid foundation it' 'this back him.' No exception ruling. continuing followed, changed recalling them, 'it' 'essentially (he) them.' sua sponte document, A colloquy bench explained earlier recollected place; 'believed' 'pretty sure' him; accurate agents; thought gave 'sure.' 'summary interview' represented agent's 'interpretation happened.' moment later again asked, 'Has interviewed?' answered received referred Attorney, adjourned day. 40 morning conference chambers asserted notes, longer existence. long discussion ensued concerning (Toomey) document,' 'say denied, free agent, or, more simply, ask proposed jury, affirmative, given purposes. Both sides move. argued event defendants' objected negated conformed FBI. 'substantially Toomey,' thereupon impeachment. Thereupon moved accordance entire stricken failed document.' denied. 41 presents separate kept apart. First, procedural requirements, when announces cannot documents possess existence? Secondly, Act? I. 42 Title judge, 'order States' Nothing remotely suggests Congress' intent Government, penalizing consequences, all records countless interviews connected investigation various branches Government. legislation narrowed application construed lower courts, partly relevancy material district prior production. 2. 43 Petitioners' contention words of' interpreted meaning 'possession time' rejected. Congress surely intend initiate game chance whereby admission depend file clerk's accuracy care. Senator O'Mahoney, sponsor bill, illustrating measure essential apply 'had same files statement' pertinent 103 Cong.Rec. 10120. 5; 5.1 44 Here whereabouts today holds disposition documents, becomes subsequent summary. Defendants truth responses non-existence notes. alert protect clients' through procedures tactics. investigate response officer well assumption intentionally irresponsibly violated conducting manner basic legal ethics professional How regarding claim differ document? available, devolved instead whatever thrown matter. Is do, choose, judgment, do? places voluntary defender already adequately represented. seems questionable here satisfied disposed bona fide manner. invent hypothetical situations independent action revealed unexpected facts. There suggestion, hint—either court, below, here—that representation fide, chicane fraud bringing protection dignity honor, manifestation inadequacy action. II. 46 issue presented put court. Subsection (e) defines production: 47 '(1) 48 '(2) stenographic, mechanical, electrical, recording, transcription thereof, 49 plain differentiation clauses while latter encompasses another. paper, desired form approval assure authenticity. quiet doubts adequate scrutinize verification prepared. appropriate safeguards impeaching stand. prescribes content recital' contemporaneously. 'Clearly provision allows mechanical stenographic recordings though transcribed.' 1224, Producibility, drawn person whole recorded. standard, summarization selective portions fall scope '(B)eyond restrictive standard applied' defining language. supra, 360, 1228. (2), difference summaries witness; eliminate danger distortion misrepresentation inherent merely selects portions, albeit accurately, lengthy recital.' 352, 1225. bill originally came House Judiciary Committee, 16125, 6. revision finally enacted clear orally meet verbatim' produced impeachment.2 Appendix B, 358—360, 1227. 50 determine constituted needed explicitness establish test proof, asking agree indulged deny avoid impeachment; produced, potentiality examined contents. 51 submitting, hearing warrant reversal proves itself, face, 600-word summary 1/2-hour conference, virtually transcript. 355, 12. comes slightly 500 words. silent duration Nor disclose recorded,3 how recording transcribed. However doubtful seem, fact brief, than few minutes, conversation entirety faithfully account transpired. 52 defendants, elucidated, pursue ascertainment correctness demandable existence, reprehensible reason chargeable That like evidentiary demand. production—here, existence document—is wanting, explanation non-production. determining confidential resolving rests means ascertaining judgment. 53 probed matters, vital quality report, interrogating counsel, suggests, examining interview.4 patently recourse meets 3500. Demands reports witnesses. '(a) brought prospective (other defendant) subpena, discovery, '(b) (as hereinafter defined) testified. use. '(c) claims section contains camera. excise With excised, If, pursuant procedure, portion withheld objects withholding, continued adjudication guilt text preserved appeals, judge. Whenever section, discretion, reasonably preparation '(d) elects comply paragraph (b) (c) hereof thereof direct, proceed unless discretion mistrial declared. '(e) term 'statement,' used subsections (b), relation means— Added Pub.L. 85—269, Sept. 2, 71 Stat. 595. follows: 'XQ. Now, Witness, less 18, them? 'The Court: know. Witness: Yes. you, sir? A. essentially tell yes? didn't actually me mean, first story, Well, you? believe did. memory am pretty enable him? excuse me, trying rack brain happened. right. sure. couldn't remember before—' sealed Appeals. released here. full 'Federal Report. home address 259 Island Street, Stoughton, customer victim bank, advised arrived Norfolk County Trust Company transact business 10:15 A.M., 1957. driving truck parked beside Canton Depot, parking area located railroad depot bank. noted unusual entered notice anything walking vehicle went teller's window served Kennedy line window, waited Kennedy, heard somebody state behind 'Over against wall.' looked around negro, gray chino pants, center lobby gun. immediately realized once took deposits consisted cash slid trouser pocket. instant toward front short period Court's possess, 98, 428. plainly speaks 'statement States.' Insofar conclusively disagree. language, still find Section 3500(e)(1) inapplicable. Aside conflicting chambers, repeatedly interviewed. Assuming true, irrelevant; contemporaneous made. Calling thing controvert assertion possession. deal with.

Category: 0