In Re: Petition To Stay The Effectiveness of Formal Ethics Opinion 2017-F-163

Syllabus

The Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference (\TNDAGC\) filed with this Court a petition to vacate Formal Ethics Opinion 2017-F-163 (\Opinion\) issued by the Board of Professional Responsibility (\Board\) regarding ethical considerations for prosecutors under Rule 3.8(d) of the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct. The TNDAGC also requested that the Court stay the effectiveness of the Opinion pending review. This Court determined that a full and deliberate review of the issues was necessary and granted a stay of the effectiveness of the Opinion. Based on our review, we decline to interpret a prosecutor's ethical duty under Rule 3.8(d) as being more expansive than one's legal obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, or that \timely\ disclosure of the material should be interpreted as \as soon as reasonably practicable.\ Accordingly, we vacate Formal Ethics Opinion 2017-F-163 of the Board of Professional Responsibility. We also take this opportunity to interpret Rule 3.8(d) as coextensive in scope with a prosecutor's legal obligations under Brady and its progeny, as explained in this opinion.