Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
O.C.G.A. § 27-1303 is similar in effect to O.C.G.A. § 27-1302, which excludes from evidence a defendant's pretrial statements if they are not supplied to the defense at least 10 days prior to trial after appropriate request. If the statutory 10 days of O.C.G.A. § 27-1302 are not complied with, evidence of defendant's pretrial statements must be excluded. Such reasoning is equally applicable to O.C.G.A. § 27-1303.
Meminger was convicted for armed robbery by the use of an offensive weapon. He appealed his conviction claiming error because the trial court overruled his objections when the State's witnesses testified as to the contents of scientific reports. He objected because the State had not complied with O.C.G.A. § 27-1303 by furnishing him copies of the reports at least 10 days prior to trial after his proper request.
Did the trial court err in admitting the State's witnesses’ testimonies as to the contents of scientific reports notwithstanding the State’s noncompliance with O.C.G.A. § 27-1303?
The court reversed Meminger’s conviction and held that as the scientific reports pertained to the analysis of certain hair and blood specimens taken from Meminger’s clothing which bore on his identification as the perpetrator of the robbery and, even though there was other evidence of guilt, it could not have said as a matter of law that Meminger was not prejudiced by the improper admission of the evidence. Because the statutory 10 days under O.C.G.A. § 27-1303 were not complied with, the testimony based upon the scientific reports was improperly received in evidence. The evidence of striking the victim in the head with a bottle of liquor followed by the taking of her money was sufficient to authorize a rational jury to have found Meminger guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. All other assignments of error were without merit.