Haywood Erwing, Jr. v. United States
Opinion
Opinion
This is an appeal from a conviction of narcotics violation under 21 U.S.C. § 174 (1964). We affirm.
There are four specifications of error. The first is that the court refused to order the production of daily time and expense sheets maintained by a narcotics agent witness. Following the witness’s testimony appellant demanded production of the agent’s investigative report, his case summary, and his time sheets under the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500 (1964). The first two were available and were produced. The last had been sent to Washington and was therefore not available. Appellant moved to strike the agent’s testimony unless the time sheets were immediately produced. The court agreed that appellant was entitled to the reports, but declined to strike the agent’s testimony or to order immediate production of the time sheets since their unavailability would have rendered such an order “an idle act.” However, the court informed the appellant that the court would order production of the time sheets for appellant’s future use if appellant wished, and asked whether appellant wanted to make a motion in this respect. Appellant said he did not.