UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
HOLLIS CLARK, 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 polygraph examination results are inadmissible in the Fifth Circuit.
The defendant was convicted of mail conspiracy and sought to admit polygraph results related to his intent. The trial court excluded this evidence.…
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 Admissibility Of Polygraph Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
In this mail conspiracy conviction, 18 U.S. C.A. §§ 1708, 371, the defendant’s knowledge and intent were critical. The sole contention on this appeal is that the trial court should have admitted the results of a polygraph examination of defendant relating to his specific intent regarding his involvement in the mail theft conspiracy. He argues that the evidentiary exclusion violated his constitutional right of due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
Although other circuits have granted some discretion in admitting polygraph evidence, United States v. Mayes, 512 F. 2d 637, 648 n.6 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1008, 95 S.Ct. 2629, 45 L.Ed.2d 670 (1975); United States v. Flores, 540 F. 2d 432, 436-437 (9th Cir. 1976); United States v. Ridling, 350 F.Supp. 90 (E.D.Mich.1972), the Fifth Circuit precedents unequivocally hold that such evidence is inadmissible. United States v. Masri, 547 F. 2d 932, 936 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 932, 97 S.Ct. 2640, 53 L.Ed.2d 249 (1977); United States v. Cochran, 499 F. 2d 380, 393 (5th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1124, 95 S.Ct. 810, 42 L.Ed.2d 825 (1975); United States v. Gloria, 494 F. 2d 477, 483 (5th Cir. 1974); United States v. Frogge, 476 F. 2d 969, 970 (5th Cir. 1973).
Any suggested deviation from the clear law of this Circuit would have to be addressed to the en banc court. United States v. Hernandez, 580 F. 2d 188, 191 (5th Cir. 1978), aff'd and remanded, 591 F. 2d 1019 (en banc) (1979).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Simeon v. State, 520 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
-
United States v. Martino, 648 F.2d 367 (5th Cir. 1981)
-
United States v. Rodriguez, 765 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1985)
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (14 total)
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Raven v. United States, 419 U.S. 1124 (U.S. 1975)
- United States v. Mayes, 512 F.2d 637 (6th Cir. 1975)
- Mayes v. United States, 422 U.S. 1008 (U.S. 1975)
- United States v. Hernandez, 591 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1979)
- United States v. Cochran, 499 F.2d 380 (5th Cir. 1974)
- United States v. Gloria, 494 F.2d 477 (5th Cir. 1974)
- Owens v. United States, 422 U.S. 1008 (U.S. 1975)
- United States v. Samih K. Masri and Wally Ghalayini, 547 F.2d 932 (5th Cir. 1977)
- Archie v. Mississippi, 431 U.S. 932 (U.S. 1977)