Court Opinion

ID: 9849403
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:39:43.856758+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:22.829169
License: Public Domain

Smith and McCown, JJ.,
concurring in result.
The State offered little or no evidence of some tests, and defendant says that the State may have suppressed evidence of his innocence. Although we cannot now approximate some effects of nondisclosure, the, denial of inspection in view of our prior decisions was' not erroneous. Precedent has almost given the district court carte blanche to refuse inspection. That policy which is reinforced by the majority opinion should be prospectively revised. An accused should ordinarily have a right at least to inspect and copy reports on scientific tests of physical objects and conditions. Cf. Fed. R. Crim. p. 16.