vinayd
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2013
- Messages
- 532
- Reaction score
- 3,854
Reading through this now. Here is what stands out to me which we discussed yesterday and I asked if this would be the State's work product.This is an interesting paper on discovery written by Lorinda Youngcourt.
Home - National Criminal Defense College - NCDC - National Criminal Defense College › faculty › name › lorinda-youngcourt
Lorinda Youngcourt represented Indiana and Illinois capital and non-capital clients in trial, direct appeal, state post-conviction, and federal habeas.
IMO it's worth the read for those interested in understanding some of the D's actions in this case. It's 18 pgs long but, for now, I'm only going to quote a couple of paragraphs.
********************
... Lorinda Youngcourt
In this chapter I have tried to outline some basic principals about discovery and how it can be used in capital litigation.
I. STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS
Counsel to a death charged defendant is always striving to learn as much information about her case as quickly as possible. Whether counsel should try to learn this information through formal discovery pleadings or informal interviews is a strategic decision.
A. Make a record. . . make a record. . . make a record. . . make a record. No one wants to lose a death penalty case, but unfortunately it happens. Unless you have made a record of the items you tried to discover but did not receive, there is no issue to pursue on appeal.
B. Once discovery is filed, the burden is on the State to respond. If the State does not adequately respond, it creates an issue to be litigated in pre-trial motions. An inadequate response may lay the ground work for a continuance.
https://www.in.gov/ipdc/files/DISCOVER.pdf
Pg 4
Although police reports are not discoverable because of the work product exception,
1 a lazy prosecutor, when faced with having to sift through stacks of police reports to answer defense discovery, may determine that providing counsel with copies of all the reports is an easy solution. Verbatim witness statements are discoverable and obviously useful.
State Ex Rel. Keaton v. Cir. Ct. of Rush Cty.
We have recognized that in criminal litigation protection must be extended to the attorneys' work product. State ex rel. Meyers, supra; Spears, supra. The work product doctrine protects materials prepared by agents for the attorney as well as those prepared by the attorney himself. United States v. Nobles (1975), 422 U.S. *1148 225, 95 S. Ct. 2160, 45 L. Ed. 2d 141; Spears, supra. Protection should therefore be afforded to police reports which, as contended by relator, constitute the work product of the prosecuting attorney.