Trombetta/Youngblood Conundrum
Yesterday I lost a Trombetta/Youngblood* motion. A Trombetta/Youngblood motion invites the court to dismiss a case when evidence has been destroyed by the prosecution.To win a Trombetta/Youngblood motion, the moving party must show that the destroyed evidence was "potentially exculpatory," and that no comparable evidence exists.
So how on earth can you show that the destroyed evidence was "potentially exculpatory" without having comparable evidence?
*California v. Trombetta (1984) 467 U.S. 479; Arizona v. Youngblood (1988) 488 U.S. 51.
posted by brainmarket @ 12:47 PM
1 Comments:
I think the only time I had a good basis was when the dispatcher destroyed the tape of the male half's call to 911 and not the female's. Do I have to say it was a DV case?
Post a Comment
<< Home