In re Rosecran's Will

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that failure of crime lab to disclose evidence did not relieve prosecutor of obligation to review lab files for exculpatory evidence because \no serious dispute\ that state run crime laboratory part of \investigative team\
• holding that failure of crime lab to disclose evidence did not relieve prosecutor of obligation to review lab files for exculpatory evidence because “no serious dispute” that state run crime laboratory part of “investigative team”
• recognizing a crime lab as part of the prosecution team and that “any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government’s behalf is imputed to the prosecution”
• recognizing a crime lab as part of the prosecution team and that \any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf is imputed to the prosecution\
• “The individual prosecutor is presumed to have knowledge of all information gathered in connection with the government’s investigation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).