Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Greene, "Thus the term 'Brady violation' is sometimes used to refer to any breach of the broad obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence – that is, to any suppression of so-called 'Brady material' – although strictly speaking, there is never a real 'Brady violation' unless the nondisclosure was so serious that there is a reasonable ...
Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States , the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty ( exculpatory evidence ).
It is incumbent upon the defense to file a motion with the court that it believes that the failure of the prosecution to produce the document is a violation of the Jencks Act. [105] [106] If the interests of justice require such, the trial is properly called a mistrial. [13] [104]
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Pub.L. 103–159, 107 Stat. 1536, enacted November 30, 1993), often referred to as the Brady Act, the Brady Bill or the Brady Handgun Bill, is an Act of the United States Congress that mandated federal background checks on firearm purchasers in the United States.
Per the Brady v. Maryland decision, prosecutors in the United States have a duty to disclose exculpatory evidence even if not requested to do so. While the prosecution is not required to search for exculpatory evidence and must disclose only the evidence in its possession, custody, or control, the prosecution's duty is to disclose all ...
Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether a prosecutor's office can be held liable for a single Brady violation by one of its members on the theory that the office provided inadequate training. [1]
[P]rovide information regarding T–I and other violations committed by Hughes A. Bagley, Jr.; that he will purchase evidence for ATF; that he will cut [sic ] in an undercover capacity for ATF; that he will assist ATF in gathering of evidence and testify against the violator in federal court. Bagley moved to vacate his sentence under Brady v
This constituted a violation of the rule in United States v. Brady that pleas have to be voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made. [1] The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and gave three primary reasons for doing so. [2]