Court Opinion

ID: 9473968
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:44:44.210466+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:43:50.474815
License: Public Domain

FAY, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
Most respectfully, I dissent from the majority’s reversal of the Hiltons’ convictions. As acknowledged in the majority opinion, there is no question surrounding the sufficiency of the evidence establishing guilt. The jury was faced with the usual questions of credibility as to the witnesses and particularly those who had been involved in the illegal scheme to import large quantities of cocaine.
During the taking of testimony it was developed that certain government witnesses had entered into plea bargain agreements. As stressed by the majority, it was brought out that these witnesses had offered to take a lie detector test. As far as this record shows, no polygraph examinations have been completed. No indication was made as to any results — good or bad— as there were none! I fail to see how the offer to take a lie detector test bolsters, unfairly, a witness’ testimony.
As pointed out by the concluding paragraph of the majority opinion:
The test for improper bolstering is whether the prosecutor’s words might reasonably have led the jury to believe that the government possessed extrinsic evidence, not presented to the jury, that convinced the prosecutor of the defendant’s guilt.
Here there is simply no indication of any such extrinsic evidence. I would affirm the convictions.