Court Opinion

ID: 9472084
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 03:48:56.823716+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:42:44.247603
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing
ALDRICH, Senior Circuit Judge.
On petition for rehearing the government has been prompted to cite an FBI regulation, and advance reasons why, from the standpoint of obtaining accurate handwriting exemplars, there may be proper advantages in dictation over a written request; e.g., speed and surprise, to reduce conscious manipulation. We accept this, but add that it should have been said before. We remain of opinion, however, that spelling is an intellectual process as distinguished from the pure physical habit or characteristics that make handwriting demandable, and are surprised at the government’s persistence in arguing otherwise. Requiring an intellectual process, however subtly, over objection, is a clear violation of the Fifth Amendment.
Nor will we accept the government’s undertaking not to rely upon misspelling comparisons. Even if no mention were made of it, a jury could well notice a duplication of mistakes. On the new trial we will permit the use of dictated exemplars, but only on the basis that, if any misspelling occurs, the jury be instructed — whether in fact true or not — that the government dictated the spelling, and that no inference is to be drawn therefrom. If defendant refuses to comply even on this basis, comment on the refusal shall be permitted.
The petition for rehearing is otherwise denied.