UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
BRUCE EUGENE DE BETHAM, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to admit polygraphic evidence, and any error was harmless.
Appellant was convicted of possession of heroin after a jury trial waiver. He offered polygraphic evidence to support his testimony, which conflicted …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Harmless Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
After waiver of a jury trial, appellant was convicted by the court of violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844 [possession of heroin]. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and sentence. We affirm.
ISSUE
The sole issue before us is whether the trial judge committed error in failing to receive beneficial polygraphic1 evidence offered by appellant.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
In support of his contention, appellant directs our attention to volume after volume of testimony, produced at the preliminary hearing, pointing to the reliability of this type evidence. During the four day hearing, the appellant called a substantial number of experts qualified in the field of polygraphy and in the related fields of psychology, psychiatry and physiology. Simply stated, the evidence at the hearing vigorously supports the accuracy of polygraphic evidence. In the trial on the merits, the testimony of appellant was in direct conflict with that of the officers on the principal issues.
Despite the strong showing made by appellant, we are not ready to say that the trial judge abused his discretion in rejecting the offer. United States v. Salazar-Gaeta, 447 F. 2d 468, 469 (CA9 1971); United States v. Sadrzadeh, 440 F. 2d 389, 390 (CA9 1971); Frye v. United States, 54 App.D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923).
Moreover, our analysis of the record convinces us that the trial judge did not believe appellant in those instances where his testimony conflicted with that of the government witnesses. In these circumstances the error, if any, in rejecting the evidence would be harmless under Rule 52(a), FRCrimP. We do not hold that polygraphic evidence is never admissible.
Judgment affirmed.
. Lie detection.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Demma, 523 F.2d 981 (9th Cir. 1975)
-
United States v. Odell Marshall, 526 F.2d 1349 (9th Cir. 1975)
-
United States v. Alexander, 526 F.2d 161 (8th Cir. 1975)
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Johnston, 440 F.2d 389 (9th Cir. 1971)
- United States v. Arnulfo Salazar-Gaeta, 447 F.2d 468 (9th Cir. 1971)