Harry Blackmun

“ At their convenience officers were able to interrogate the incarcerated defendant, eventually eliciting from him an incriminating statement. After the mistrial the prosecutor, unlike Britt's lawyer, had access to a transcript to readjust his trial strategy.
This Court has been sensitive to the persuasive arguments for more liberal rules of criminal discovery. [14] To the extent that a State permits criminal discovery by its accused, it is our duty to forbid distribution of its fruits according to formulas based on wealth, which, like race, is a suspect classification. ”

“ An indigent's right to a transcript of grand jury testimony in the federal courts is now protected by the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, at least to the extent that any defendant-whether rich or poor-has access thereto. ”

“ Moreover, the procedure of calling a court reporter to verify hostile witnesses' contradictions has been discredited by trial commentators, including Professor Robert Keeton:
'If you have caught the witness in a contradiction, it is the more clearly shown if the exact words previously used by the witness are brought to the jury's attention. The effect may extend beyond the bearing of the contradiction on its own subject matter, for the witness may be 'broken down' so that he makes other admissions or the jury disbelieves other parts of his testimony. ”

“ The presence of perjury in criminal proceedings today is extensive despite the efforts of the courts to eradicate it and constitutes a very serious threat to the administration of criminal justice and thus to the welfare of the country as a whole. ”

“ Because I am persuaded by Britt's argument I would reverse the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals.
* Griffin v. Illinois, supra, 351 U.S., at 19, 76 S.Ct., at 591, established the now familiar principle that ' (t) here can be no equal justice where the kind of trial a man gets depends on the amount of money he has.' While Griffin involved only the provision of a free transcript to an indigent on direct appeal, its underlying principle has achieved broader usage. ”

“ Of these applications, Roberts v. LaVallee, 389 U.S. 40, 88 S.Ct. 194, 19 L.Ed.2d 41 (1967) , is most analogous to the instant circumstances. In Roberts, an indigent defendant before trial asked a state court to provide him with a free transcript of a preliminary hearing at which a key state witness had testified. In Roberts, as here, no special showing of need was made, the defendant was represented by the same counsel at all times, and the court reporter could have been called to read back previous testimony. ”

“ The North Carolina Court of Appeals, however, has rejected the Griffin-Roberts-Wilson cases and sought refuge in the pre-Roberts authority of Nickens v. United States, 116 U.S.App.D.C. 338, 323 F.2d 808 (1963) , which had emphasized, as did the court below, the defendant's failure to articulate a particular need for a transcript, the continuity of defense counsel, and the availability of the court reporter. [5] I thought that these arguments had been found irrelevant for constitutional purposes under Griffin-Roberts-Wilson. ”

“ Right of Accused in State Courts to Inspection or Disclosure of Evidence in Possession of Prosecution, 7 A.L.R.3d 8 (1966) .↑ Statutory exceptions to the common-law ban in North Carolina may be found at N.C.Gen.Stat. § 8-74 (1969) (depositions of witnesses unable to attend trial) ; and at § 15-155.4 (Supp.1969) . The latter provision was enacted in 1967 and permits limited discovery of prosecution evidence where (a) good cause is shown for discovery, (b) the prosecution intends to use the evidence at trial. ”