APPEALS COURT OVERTURNS MAN'S DRUG CONVICTION

The Utah Court of Appeals has overturned the drug conviction of a man who
argued prosecutors did not give him enough information about state experts
who testified against him during trial.

Although prosecutors showed the experts' toxicology report to the
defendant, they failed to provide adequate information on the experts who
had prepared the document, according to the ruling released Thursday.

Narcisco Castillo Tolano Jr. was arrested in April 1999 after Salt Lake
City police officers said they watched Tolano hand a motorist a package of
white powder and receive money in return. Tolano, 20, was charged with
distributing drugs after the Utah State Crime Laboratory identified the
contents of the package as cocaine.

At Tolano's preliminary hearing, prosecutors allowed Tolano to see the
toxicology report but did not provide him with a copy or any information on
the two experts who had examined the white powder. When the criminologists
identified the substance as cocaine during trial, defense attorneys asked
that the testimony either be excluded or the proceedings postponed.

Defense attorneys argued state law requires that defendants be provided
with the names, addresses, resumes and reports of any proposed expert
witnesses. But 3rd District Judge Anthony Quinn denied the motions, saying
the intent of the law is to prevent surprise, and that purpose was served
when prosecutors showed Tolano the toxicology report.

Tolano, who served 45 days in the Oxbow Jail and was placed on probation,
appealed his conviction, saying prosecutors should have provided the
information he had requested. The appeals court agreed.

The defendant's right to a fair trial "outweighed any inconvenience to the
court, the opposing party, and the jury that may have been caused by a
continuance,"' wrote Judge James Davis. Judges Judith Billings and Gregory
Orme concurred.

"Cocaine was a crucial element of the charge, without that evidence, it
would have been difficult to convict," said Heather Johnson, an attorney
with the Salt Lake Legal Defenders Association. "A defendant needs to
scrutinize what prosecutors are doing to make sure no mistakes in testing
or mix-ups have been made, and that the experts are qualified."

But Assistant Utah Attorney General Karen Klucznik said her office is
considering appealing the decision.

"We believe prosecutors provided sufficient notice, under the statute,''
she said. "In this case, for instance, the names of the experts were
identified at the preliminary hearing. We believe the requirements of the
law had been met."