Court Opinion

ID: 9517354
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 00:14:33.563224+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:43:58.462049
License: Public Domain

Quirico, J.
(concurring in the result). In this case the trial judge refused to allow the defendant to offer evidence of the results of a polygraph test taken by him unless he first testified at the trial. After the defendant testified the judge admitted the polygraph evidence but limited the jury’s consideration of the evidence to "the question of whether or not at the time of the examination the subject was telling the truth.” The court holds that the evidence was properly admitted, and that it was properly limited to the corroboration of the defendant’s testimony.
For the reasons stated in my concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Vitello, supra at 461 (1978), decided this day, I would hold that the polygraph evidence was not properly admitted for any purpose. However, since it was favorable to the defendant, éven if on the limited issue of corroboration, I would not reverse the judgment. I therefore concur in the result reached by the court.