Jackson v. United States ( 2003 )

ORDER

When this case was last before us, see Jackson v. United States, 768 A.2d 580 (D.C.2001), we retained jurisdiction of the combined appeals¹ but remanded the record for findings necessary to enable us to decide whether, in each case, the erroneous failure of the trial court to order disclosure of the form DEA-86, a “Forensic Chemist Worksheet,” was harmless under the standard of Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 764-65, 66 S.Ct. 1239, 90 L.Ed. 1557 (1946).² In each case, the remand was ordered to permit the trial judge to determine whether material discrepancies existed between the information entered on the DEA-86 form and information contained in the similar (but not identical) DEA-7 form which had been disclosed to the defense and introduced in evidence by the prosecutor at trial.

On remand, after a comparison of the now-disclosed documents, each appellant conceded in writing that no discrepancy existed between the DEA-86 and the DEA-7. The trial judge also reviewed the documents independently in each case and made a similar finding of no discrepancy.

Therefore, on the basis of the supplemented record and for the reasons otherwise stated in our original opinion, the judgments of conviction are

Affirmed.

1 . The two appellants, who were tried and convicted separately, are Joseph Jackson and Sayzon Ford.

2 . We had concluded that, on the facts of both cases, the DEA-86 was discoverable under Super. Ct. Crim. R. 16(a)(1)(D) as a "report" containing the "results ... of scientific tests” performed on controlled substances.