Court Opinion

ID: 9449575
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 16:16:00.177883+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:53.589660
License: Public Domain

BROWNING, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
It is unlikely that any one of the cases in which this Court has reversed action *946taken by a District Court in the exercise of discretion involved conduct so clearly wrong that “no reasonable man would take the view adopted by the trial court.” Certainly Judge Boldt’s order with respect to the inspection of Exhibit 22 does not require the protection of so stringent a standard. The test is whether on the whole record the reviewing court “ ‘has a definite and firm conviction that the court below committed a clear error of judgment in the conclusion it reached upon a weighing of the relevant factors.’ ” Dillon v. United States, 307 F.2d 445, 448 (9th Cir., 1962). Judge Boldt’s order met this test for it was reasonably necessary to protect the integrity of the exhibit, and at the same time preserve to defendants a fair opportunity to inspect the exhibit if, in the light of developments at trial, they should think such inspection desirable.