State v. Andres C. (Concurrence & Dissent)

Summary

Justice D’Auria concurs in part and dissents in part, agreeing that the prosecutors were not constitutionally required to personally review the journals but disagreeing with the refusal to order an official translation. He would remand the case for a certified translation and an in camera review to determine whether the journals contain material favorable to the defendant and, if so, whether it was material. He would resolve the evidentiary issue through a limited direct-appeal remand rather than defer it to a collateral proceeding.