Summaries of Successful Cases
 Under Brady v. Maryland

 

Through May 2007  

INTRODUCTION

In the landmark case of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), the Supreme Court declared that, regardless of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution, the suppression of evidence favorable to the accused violates due process where the evidence is material to either guilt or punishment.

In the more than thirty years since the Brady decision, the scope of its mandate has been found to include both direct evidence and impeachment evidence which is favorable to the defendant. The duty of disclosure is not limited to evidence in the actual possession of the prosecutor. Rather, it extends to evidence in the possession of the entire prosecution team, which includes investigative and other government agencies. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995); see also Strickler v. Greene, 119 S.Ct. 1936, at n.12 (1999).

A failure on the part of the government to disclose Brady material requires a new trial, or a new sentencing hearing, if disclosure of the evidence creates a reasonable probability of a different result. As the Court explained in Kyles, "the adjective is important," and "[t]he question is not whether the defendant would more likely than not have received a different verdict with the evidence, but whether in its absence he received a fair trial, understood as a trial resulting in a verdict worthy of confidence." Kyles, 514 U.S. at 434.

The following summaries catalogue cases which have succeeded under Brady or its progeny. This document is divided into the following categories: (1) Successful Brady Cases; (2) Cases Remanded on Brady Claims; and (3) Unsuccessful But Instructive Brady Cases.

If you kn9ow of other successful or instructive Brady cases not included in this document please advise Mark Olive at Meolive@aol.com.