Abstract
In California v. Trombetta, after testing physical evidence obtained from an accused, the police innocently destroyed the evidence and thereby prevented a defense retest. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution could introduce inculpatory scientific testimony about the test. The Court assumed that there would be a fair adversary balance at trial because the defense could introduce rebuttal evidence attacking the weight of the prosecution's scientific testimony. In this article, the authors demonstrate that the Court's assumption was mistaken and analyze the evidentiary implications of the mistake.
How to Cite
33 Ariz. L. Rev. 59 (1991)
2
Views
2
Downloads