Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963). [2] The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that might exonerate the defendant. [3]
The counsel for the plaintiff (or the People) and the defendant attend the hearing to discuss pretrial matters pertaining to the case. The purpose of the hearing is to see if the rights of the defendant have been violated, and it is the duty of the judge to make sure that the oath of office is preserved under article 6 paragraph 2, supremacy ...
Kerry P Fitzgerald, "Criminal Procedure: Pretrial, Trial and Appeal" (1991 to 1992) 45 Southwestern Law Journal 1593 (Annual Survey of Texas Law) HeinOnline Kerry P FitzGerald and Catherine Greene Burnett, "Criminal Procedure: Pretrial, Trial and Appeal" (1993) 46 SMU Law Review 1261 (No 4, Spring 1993) (Annual Survey of Texas Law) HeinOnline
The Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963). [5] The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that might exonerate the defendant. [6]
In Alaska criminal courts, discovery is governed by Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 (Cr.R.16). The scope of discovery is broad and includes much more than is required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). The discovery process is intended to provide adequate information for informed pleas, to expedite trial, minimize surprise, afford an ...
In effect, Texas law allows two people to fight and injure each other.” To a certain point. Infliction of serious bodily injury nullifies the exemption, and no weapons are allowed.
The motion is decided by a judge in both civil and criminal proceedings. It is frequently used at pre-trial hearings or during trial, and it can be used at both the state and federal levels. Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004) defines "motion in limine " as "a pretrial request that certain inadmissible evidence not
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the prosecution's failure to inform the jury that a witness had been promised not to be prosecuted in exchange for his testimony was a failure to fulfill the duty to present all material evidence to the jury, and constituted a violation of due process, requiring a new trial. [1]