Court Opinion

ID: 9642117
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:48:48.95499+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:43.183645
License: Public Domain

ON STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING OPINION MODIFIED AND MOTION OVERRULED
DALLY, Judge.
After further consideration we are of the opinion that our holding on original submission is too broad. We said:
“Restated, our holding today is simply that the appellants w.ere, and upon retrial are, entitled to the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from their initial trial and that the trial court’s denial of their requests were, under the aegis of Britt v. North Carolina and our interpretation thereof, reversible error.”
That holding is modified to make it clear that an indigent defendant need only be furnished without cost for use in a subsequent trial a transcription of the testimony of the State’s witnesses, since it is usually only that testimony that could be used for discovery and impeachment. A transcription of the testimony of defense witnesses, jury voir dire, argument of counsel, and portions of the record other than the transcription of the testimony of the State’s witnesses need only be furnished an indigent defendant for use in a subsequent trial without cost if a particular need is shown.
The opinion on original submission is modified and the State’s Motion for Rehearing is overruled.