Court Opinion

ID: 9732962
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 16:46:24.705417+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:26:59.415943
License: Public Domain

BECKER, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
The polygraph test was of crucial importance in this case. All concerned knew the State would use this evidence. To prepare for trial, defense counsel needed this tape. He particularly needed the tape if he was to use the advice (or the evidence) of an independent expert. The trial court turned this case on failure to show an independent effort to get the tape or the equal availability rationale. The State did in fact produce the evidence at trial. It was adverse to defendant. Defendant has neither subpoena power nor funds to go to Chicago to make a hostile witness produce hostile tapes. Under the circumstances defense counsel was not on par with the prosecutor. He was entitled to the tape to prepare for trial. It is no answer to say he could get it himself.
RAWLINGS, J., joins in this dissent.