Court Opinion

ID: 9884978
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 03:26:37.699865+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:43.015174
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Schaefer, dissenting: In my opinion the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Smith v. Illinois (1968), 390 U.S. 129, 19 L. Ed. 2d 956, 88 S. Ct. 748, requires reversal of the judgment in this case. The prosecution did not suggest that the defendant’s attorney had waived the objection that had occupied the attention of court and counsel over a two-day period. We should not be astute to find a waiver. Moreover, I do not know what is meant by turning over material “to the attorney for the defendant for his exclusive use,” and I think that it is unfair to place an attorney under such an ambiguous restriction.