Court Opinion

ID: 9565432
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:21:02.967788+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:38.512875
License: Public Domain

TURSI, Judge,
specially concurring.
I specially concur because of concern with the possible interpretations of Part III of our opinion.
I agree that under the facts of this case, defendant has failed to show prejudice because of the People’s failure to disclose the evidence discussed in Part III. See People v. Steed, 189 Colo. 212, 540 P.2d 323 (1975). But, what concerns me is that this opinion may be read to create an unqualified rule that there is never a duty on the People to reduce oral interviews with witnesses to writing, and thus, no duty to provide the content of the interview to defense counsel. See People v. Garcia, 627 P.2d 255 (Colo.App.1980).
Although the statement of this rule accurately reflects the prosecution’s obligation pursuant to Crim.P. 16, it cannot be used to relieve the prosecutor from the duty to disclose information which may be exculpatory or inculpatory to the defendant by the device of not reducing oral interviews to writing. See United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 96 S.Ct. 2392, 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976); See also United States v. Jackson, 579 F.2d 553 (10th Cir.1978).