Document: 344 U.S. 414 73 S.Ct. 369 97 L.Ed. 447 GORDON et al.v.UNITED STATES. No. 182. Argued Dec. 17, 18, 1952. Decided Feb. 2, 1953. Messrs. George F. Callaghan and Maurice J. Walsh, Chicago, Ill., for petitioners. Mr. John R. Wilkins, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioners Gordon MacLeod were convicted on an indictment four counts, two charging unlawful possession goods stolen while in interstate commerce1 that defendants caused this property to be further transported commerce.2 The Court Appeals affirmed,3 we granted certiorari limited questions concerning production admission documentary evidence tending impeach testimony a prosecution witness.4 2 Government proved film being shipped from Rochester, New York, Illinois, was truck Chicago part it later had been recovered Detroit. To implicate petitioners, relied principally one Marshall, who, Detroit, pleaded guilty film. Marshall testified he codefendant, Swartz, who died before trial, several occasions driven Detroit back. On each visit they stopped at petitioner Gordon's jewelry store. trip, according accompanied them garage city there man resembling helped load into Marshall's car stacked garage. A week later, said, Swartz again called Gordon, when latter sent see 'Ken' address which wrote piece paper. At address, identified himself as 'Ken,' three men loaded car. 3 Partial corroboration supplied by Federal Bureau Investigation agent, watching He occasion saw drive up MacLeod's whereupon removed old Later, drove away with cartons back seat 4 Both petitioners took stand denied complicity theft knowledge stolen. While their physical movements recited not materially different those related government witnesses, gave innocent version relationship acts criminal transactions. deceased business acquaintance asked first if knew where could temporarily stored. MacLeod, his partner rooming-house venture, told him would send over wished use rooming house. known either placed that, request merely favor. 5 cross-examination, admitted between apprehension final statement Government, implicated made or statements did not. requested trial judge order produce these earlier statements. denied. also any incriminating federal court still unsentenced no date sentencing set, although nine months elapsed since plea received. received promise immunity threats influence testify did. then sought introduce transcript proceeding district judge: 'Very well, is accepted. Now, I am going refer your case Probation Department presentence report. think should say you, said lawyer yesterday Smith upon me chambers morning, seemed you intended plead expected recommendation lenient sentence probation Department, essential satisfy have given law enforcement authorities all information merchandise involved proceeding. * holding out promises but well advised tell whole story even though might involve others.' This excluded objection immaterial. 6 charge its opinion5 recognized where, here, Government's may fall jury's belief disbelief witness, credibility subject close scrutiny. But question whether rejection petitioners' efforts withhold jury necessary discriminating appraisal trustworthiness prejudice substantial rights. issues somewhat grounds. 7 accused cast terms obtaining access rather than offer require ruling admissibility. apparently concedes, must, prejudicial error exclude statements, defense able them, production. relation admissibility inspection means settled various jurisdictions, conclude does concede enough. Demands offers raise independent ones, sometimes required show document properly excluded. 8 In absence specific legislation, nature are governed 'by principles common interpreted courts United States light reason experience.'6 Apparently, permit such documents.7 Some state jurisdictions recognize comprehensive right documents hands because aid preparation presentation defense.8 We need consider broad doctrines resolve case, deals definite category holdings likewise confined. 9 By proper counsel laid foundation demand showing existence, witness under examination, contradictory present testimony, contradiction relevant, important material matters directly bore main issue tried: participation crime. propose blind fishing expedition among possessed chance something impeaching turn up.9 Nor taken persons informants offered witnesses.10 assert privilege grounds national security, confidential character, public interest, otherwise. 10 Despite some contrary below relied, reasoning outweighed highly respectable authority lower support view entitled documents.11 Indeed, find hard withstand force Judge Cooley's observation similar situation 'the has interest interposing obstacle disclosure facts, unless interested convicting parties untrustworthy persons.'12 our experience, better rule overruled objections advanced ordered documents. 11 court, course, admissibility, appropriate only argues judge, exercise discretion, prior amounted reversible error, decline misconceives issue. It unnecessary decide once produced inspected.13 For purposes, appear competent, outside exclusionary rule; rarely can understandingly discretion seen, appellate rationally excluding unknown record or, so, harmless. answered application traditional canons evidence, exclusion overlooked harmless error. 12 affirmed ground admission, implicit resort demand. cannot agree. contained writing bar itself providing meets other requirements valid claim raised against it.14 elementary wisdom best rests fact more reliable, complete accurate source contents meaning anyone's description less true extent circumstances contradiction. hold rule, will emphasize jury, inform document's weight significance.15 Traditional rules prevent opening door differ immaterial matters. alleged contradictions witness' relate collateral very incrimination Except believed, conviction probably had. Yet, got Swartz; fifth so after judicial admonition consider. implication decisive. Since, far now informed record, admitted, accept contention based premise free them. deny 13 second effort parts already quoted proceedings Although pleading offense unsentenced, threats. shown retained power fix sentence, discussing expectation 'recommendation probation' urged knew, 'even Involvement others, whom theretofore mentioned, soon followed. heard warning addition matter brought cross-examination. what admonition, nor how we, they, construe meaning. imply criticism it, expressly stated promise. effect words mind conduct prisoner whose put large measure speaker. They regarded incentive supply motive duty recount facts remember Reluctant experienced scope importance constrains us erroneously 14 believe, moreover, combination errors sufficiently reversal. brief, strongly widest sort urges irregularity disregard harmless16 affirm conviction. aware necessity give wide latitude control especially dealing character. Michelson v. States, 335 469, 69 213, 93 168. principle expanded justify curtailment keeps relevant bearing crucial testimony. Reversals trivial, theoretical rulings. unlikely influenced verdict. believe prejudiced rights judgment must reversed. 15 Reversed. 18 U.S.C. (Supp. V) § 659, U.S.C.A. 659. 2314, 2314. Cir., 196 F.2d 886. 813, 33. 886, 888. Funk 290 371, 54 212, 78 369; Fed.Rules Crim.Proc. 26, Wigmore Evidence, 1859g. Wharton's Criminal Evidence (11th ed.) 785. As pretrial discovery stage, compare Civ.Proc. 34, 28 U.S.C.A., narrower provisions 16. Goldman 316 129, 62 993, 86 1322, notes inspected neither used proof inconsistent Asgill 60 776; Krulewitch, 145 76, 79, 156 A.L.R. 337; People Davis, 52 Mich. 569, N.W. 362; State Bachman, 41 Nev. 197, 168 P. 733; Schainuck, 286 N.Y. 161, 164, 36 N.E.2d 94; 262 140, 186 N.E. 422. 42 573, 362, 363. note passing relating impeachment self-contradiction, provide substantive contain within themselves guarantee multiplication confusion issues. Therefore otherwise admissible type vague amorphous area cross-examination character witnesses. See 1037; 1309. usually opposing proponent meet standards. Its merit assurance most possible commends extension unique seeks rely it. 16 admonishes 'Any defect, variance affect shall disregarded.'

Category: 0