United States v. Bruce Eugene De Betham

470 F.2d 1367
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 12, 1973
Docket72-2732
StatusPublished
Cited by55 cases

This text of 470 F.2d 1367 (United States v. Bruce Eugene De Betham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Bruce Eugene De Betham, 470 F.2d 1367 (9th Cir. 1973).

Opinion

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 polygraphic 1 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.

1

. Lie detection.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Walker
2018 MT 312 (Montana Supreme Court, 2018)
United States v. Juan A. Benavidez-Benavidez
217 F.3d 720 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
Commonwealth v. Mendes
547 N.E.2d 35 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1989)
State v. Fain
774 P.2d 252 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1989)
United States v. Brown
720 F.2d 1059 (Ninth Circuit, 1983)
United States v. Dorfman
532 F. Supp. 1118 (N.D. Illinois, 1981)
People v. Anderson
637 P.2d 354 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1981)
State v. Dean
307 N.W.2d 628 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1981)
Commonwealth v. Council
421 A.2d 623 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1980)
State v. Collins
612 P.2d 775 (Utah Supreme Court, 1980)
United States v. Roberts
481 F. Supp. 1385 (C.D. California, 1980)
United States v. Grant
473 F. Supp. 720 (D. South Carolina, 1979)
State v. Catanese
368 So. 2d 975 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1979)
Lhost v. State
271 N.W.2d 121 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1978)
Corbett v. State
584 P.2d 704 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1978)
Commonwealth v. Vitello
381 N.E.2d 582 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1978)
State v. Pleasant
583 P.2d 680 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1978)
State v. Fuentes
577 P.2d 452 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
470 F.2d 1367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bruce-eugene-de-betham-ca9-1973.