|
Baker v. State
35 Md.App. 593 (1977)
Facts: Defense counsel asked the testifying officer to
read the report to refresh his memory but the court didn’t allow it because the
report was made by someone else.
Issue: Can a witness look at something, prepared by someone
else, to refresh his memory?
Holding: Yes
Reasoning: In this case, the report was not being admitted
as evidence but was merely to be used to refresh the memory of the officer. The
Court confusion present memory revived with past recollection recorded. In the
latter, much higher standards apply. But in the former, the report is merely
being used as a stimulus and the officer is not admitting the truth of what is
included in the report.
|
