State v. Burgess

7 Citing cases

  1. U.S. v. Iglesias

    881 F.2d 1519 (9th Cir. 1989)   Cited 35 times
    Holding that homeowner's consent to search was not rendered involuntary when police officer confronted her with separation from her small child

    Id. at 268. In State v. Burgess, 482 So.2d 651 (La. Ct.App. 1986), the court held that a Louisiana discovery statute similar in part to Rule 16 required more than the conclusory report of two experts. The trial court had held that "results mean the ultimate result, not all of the combined tests that might go into coming to an ultimate result or report."

  2. State v. Charles

    602 So. 2d 15 (La. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 6 times
    In State v. Charles, 602 So.2d 15 (La.App. 3d Cir.1992), writ granted in part and amended,607 So.2d 566 (La.1992), the court recognized the extremely prejudicial effect of DNA testing and held that a defendant is entitled to a pretrial hearing on the admissibility of DNA test results, if such a hearing is requested.

    4 Cir. 1983), writ denied, 435 So.2d 439 (La. 1983), the court held that, where the State had furnished the defendant with a copy of the crime laboratory's report indicating a positive result for cocaine and with a sample of contraband for the defendant's own testing, the refusal to permit further discovery of the analytical methods of the State's chemists was not error in the absence of a showing of prejudice to the defendant. In State v. Burgess, 482 So.2d 651 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1985), the court held that the disclosure of the various examination and/or test results used by an expert to formulate his conclusionary opinion is necessary for the defendant's adequate preparation for trial, particularly the cross-examination of that expert. Fundamental fairness and due process require that the defense be given the opportunity prior to trial to examine the basis from which an expert reaches his conclusion, since the expert must lay the proper foundation before he gives his opinion.

  3. Stelly v. Coreil

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-1598 (W.D. La. Nov. 15, 2007)

    If the state has not provided the relator with this evidence, the state must answer relator's motion for discovery in accordance with La.C.Cr.P. Art. 719. See, State v. Burgess, 482 So.2d 651 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1985).

  4. State v. Guidry

    271 So. 3d 275 (La. Ct. App. 2019)   Cited 2 times

    If the expert witness has not reduced his results to writing, or if the expert witness's written report does not contain the information required of an expert as provided in this Article, the state must produce for the defendant a written summary containing any information required to be produced pursuant to this Article but absent from a written report, if any, including the name of the expert witness, his qualifications, a list of materials upon which his conclusion is based, and his opinion and the reason therefor. To support his argument, Defendant cites State v. Burgess , 482 So.2d 651 (La.App. Cir. 1985), where the fourth circuit held that expert examinations and test results made by an expert witness were subject to discovery under La.Code Crim.P. art. 719. Although we were unable to find any jurisprudence analogous to the case at hand, Burgess is distinguishable from the instant case because in Burgess , the State produced the final reports of the experts but tried to prevent discovery of the experts' test results by marking them as not intended for use at trial and by claiming they were work product and thus immune from discovery.

  5. State v. Stelly

    645 So. 2d 804 (La. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 5 times

    If the state has not provided the relator with this evidence, the state must answer relator's motion for discovery in accordance with La.C.Cr.P. Art. 719. See, State v. Burgess, 482 So.2d 651 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1985). Accordingly, the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.

  6. State v. Cunningham

    108 N.C. App. 185 (N.C. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 16 times
    Holding that, when prosecutor stated at sentencing hearing that defendant had prior convictions of loitering and resisting a public officer, defense counsel's statement that the defense would object to the loitering as not carrying a sixty-day sentence amounted to an admission or stipulation that defendant had the prior convictions asserted by the prosecutor

    Id.; see also 2 A.B.A. Standards for Criminal Justice, Commentary to Standard 11-2.1(a)(iv) (2d ed. 1980 Supp. 1986) (advocating pretrial access by defense counsel to "relevant tests" to enable counsel to determine that the tests performed were appropriate and to become familiar with test procedures); Fed.R.Crim.P. 16 advisory committee's note, 1974 amendment (indicating that the term "any results or reports" is to be given a liberal, not a restricted construction); United States v. Penix, 516 F. Supp. 248 (W.D.Okla. 1981) (defendant entitled to copies of all scientific tests performed on cocaine pursuant to his request for "any and all results" of physical or mental examination or of tests); State v. Burgess, 482 So.2d 651 (La.Ct.App. 1985) (discovery statute similar in part to federal Rule 16 required more than the conclusory report of two experts in order to afford defendant an opportunity to prepare adequately for trial). As previously discussed, the relevant portion of Section 15A-903(e) provides that, upon motion by defendant, the court must order the prosecutor to allow defendant access to "results or reports . . . of tests . . . made in connection with the case . . . [and] within the possession, custody, or control of the State . . . ."

  7. State in Interest of H.B

    580 So. 2d 1062 (La. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 1 times

    The requested documents do not fall within this article. State v. Burgess, 482 So.2d 651 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1985), cited by the defense is not on point. The Burgess panel (with J. Barry dissenting) held that disclosure of the various examination and/or test results used by an expert to formulate his opinion was necessary for the defendant's trial preparation.