Legal Opinion · Dissent

Booth v. State

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided April 29, 2011No. A-10281Published

1DissentBolger, Judge

I respectfully dissent. The district court's ruling was a reasonable application of the appropriate rule.

Judge Miller ruled that the defendant had not made a sufficient showing that the requested records were material to his defense:

The defense has made no showing that the records sought contain evidence relevant to Mr. Booth's defense. The court cannot compel production based on conjecture as to what might exist in these records.

This ruling accurately stated the appropriate legal standard. Alaska Criminal Rule 16(b)(7) provides:

Upon a reasonable request showing materiality to the preparation…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. People v. GissendannerNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. State v. BlackwellWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. United States v. Ronald DriscollCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992
  4. People v. GarciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Schmid v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1980

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API