As explained by the Supreme Court, disclosure is a constitutional requirement when the evidence in the possession of the prosecutor or the prosecution team is important for this purpose. However, potential impeachment information has generally been defined as dismissal information that is important to the defense. In situations where FBI laboratory tests have yielded conclusions that have no apparent evidentiary value, but the defense attorney intends to subpoena the examiner to testify, the United States Attorney (U.S. (Department of Justice) must inform the defense attorney of the FBI policy that it requires the defense attorney to pay for the examiner's travel expenses.
However, depending on the complexity of the forensic evidence or when multiple forensic tests have been performed, the process can be complicated because it may require the prosecutor to work together with several forensic scientists to identify and prepare additional information relevant for disclosure. As a general rule, and taking into account the facts and circumstances of individual cases, prosecutors must provide a comprehensive discovery related to forensic scientific evidence, as described here. Previously, defense attorneys could hide the ball and then present evidence and witnesses to the prosecution at trial. If the electronic communication contains confidential information, the prosecutor should consider filing a request for a protection order, seeking approval from a supervisor to delay disclosure, making appropriate drafting, summarizing the content of an electronic communication in a letter instead of disclosing the electronic communication itself, or taking other safeguarding measures. In addition, in the case of forensic witnesses employed by the government, Giglio's information must be collected at the employing agency and reviewed for possible disclosure.
This registration obligation also extends to information that prosecutors are required to disclose under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16 and 26.2 and the Jencks Act. If the prosecutor chooses this route, he must warn the defense that he is choosing to present evidence beyond what is required in the circumstances of the case, but he does not commit to any discovery obligation beyond the discovery obligations established above. On December 9, 1996, the Attorney General published a policy regarding the disclosure to prosecutors of possible impeachment data relating to witnesses from law enforcement agencies (Giglio policy). The agency will maintain court judgments and related allegations on information that has been disclosed to the Court or to the defense in a way that allows quick access to it when requested.
any requesting official. B) inform the employing agency official if the information was disclosed to a court or to the defense and, if so, if the court ruled that the information was admissible for use as impeachment information; and. While discovery issues are often the subject of litigation in criminal cases, keeping a record of disclosures limits litigation to substantive issues and avoids protracted disputes over what was disclosed. Members of the prosecution team should keep for subsequent review and possible disclosure all substantive electronic communications created or received by team members during the investigation and prosecution, as well as all electronic communications sent or received from lay witnesses, regardless of their content.
Rule 16 of the Federal Criminal Procedure Regulations establishes three disclosure responsibilities for prosecutors that may be relevant to forensic evidence. In any case, legislatures are likely to enact more discovery requirements for defense and judges are likely to respect them.
