Obtaining a mirror image of the hard drive
In most cases, the defense will want to acquire a mirror image of the hard drive. Of course, the State will strongly resist this. In New Jersey, the Appellate Division in State v. Cohen ordered the State to produce the hard drive for the defense. Unfortunately, this was an unpublished decision. However, in State v. Boyd, 160 Wash. 2d 424, 158 P.3d 54 (2007), the court suggested that the failure to provide the defendant with a mirror image of the hard drive for independent testing by a defense expert would violate the right to effective representation and a fair trial. Although a state case, Boyd is worth reviewing.
If any attorneys have cases from any jurisdiction on this topic, please leave a comment below and I will include the case law on this issue so that all lawyers can have access to same.
One possible solution is to replace the contraband files with dummy files. The problem here is that this will not create an exact replica of the drive as any addition or deletion of files may change other aspects of the drive. Both parties would have to consent that this redacted version of the drive is still an accurate representation so that any conclusions derived therefrom by the defense experts cannot be challenged on this ground. If any attorneys have tried this approach, please leave a comment below with your experiences.
Posted on May 11, 2013, in Post-Indictment Strategy and tagged Delaware County Child Porn Attorney, Delaware County Child Pornography Lawyer. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.
Leave a comment