IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA

STATE OF ALABAMA, )

)

vs. ) DC-15-4922

)

CAMERON HARRISON )

)

Defendant. )

MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FILED BY DEFENDANT

COMES NOW the State of Alabama, by and through Assistant District Attorney,

ChaLea Tisdale, and files this motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum to the Spanish Fort

Police Department filed by the Defendant in this matter. As grounds therefore, the State

would show as follows:

1. The defense has filed the subpoena duces tecum in this case in an attempt to

circumvent the rules of discovery and law of this state with regard to discovery

by a defendant in a criminal case.

2. The subpoena is due to be quashed as an improper method of seeking

discovery in a criminal case.

3. “Alabama courts have often said that a subpoena duces tecum is not a method

of discovery.” State v. Lewis, 36 So. 3d 72, 80 (Ala. Crim. App. 2008). “In

Alabama, a subpoena duces tecum does not ‘embrace[] discovery as one of its

purposes’…and should not be employed as a ‘fishing expedition.’” State v.

Reynolds), 819 So. 2d 72 (Ala. 1999) (citing Ex parte Anniston Personal

Loans, Inc., 266 Ala. 356 (1957); Williams v. State, 383 So. 2d 547 (Ala.

Crim. App. 1979); Ex parte Darring, 242 Ala. 621 (1942).)

4. “’A subpoena compels the production of evidence. It is not a means of

informational discovery, nor does it serve as an investigatory tool to enable a

ELECTRONICALLY FILED11/20/2015 9:24 PM

05-DC-2015-004922.00CIRCUIT COURT OF

BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMAJODY WISE CAMPBELL, CLERK

DOCUMENT 26

party to examine information or to interview a witness prior to trial to ascertain

the existence of relevant evidence or testimony’…The right to compel material

pursuant to a subpoena is, therefore, limited to the compulsion of “evidence”

and is not a right to compel the production of documents that refer to evidence

or that provide leads that will assist in the identification of evidence or to

ascertain the existence of witnesses or evidence.” Ex parte Summit Medical

Center of Montgomery, Inc., 854 So. 2d 614 (Ala. 2003).

5. Rule 17.3 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure addresses the issuance of

subpoenas duces tecum. ALA . RULES CRIM . P. 17.3.

6. The Committee Comments to Rule 17.3 state as follows: “This rule is not

intended to be a discovery device because Rule 16 provides for discovery. This

rule is to be used to inspect evidence held by witnesses and to require its

production at trial or prior to trial.”

WHEREFORE, the above-stated premises considered, the State prays this Honorable

Court enter an Order Quashing the subpoena duces tecum filed by the Defendant in this case.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ ChaLea Tisdale________

CHALEA TISDALE

Assistant District Attorney

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have filed this pleading with Alacourt’s Alafile system, which

will serve a copy electronically on Defense Counsel.

/s/: ChaLea Tisdale_____________

CHALEA TISDALE

DOCUMENT 26