Randall Amado v. Terri Gonzalez

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the requirement of due diligence is contrary to federal law as clearly established by the Supreme Court and unsound public policy
• recognizing that, under Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154 (1972), the Government “must disclose all material impeachment evidence” concerning prosecution witnesses, including “evidence relating to cooperation agreements”
• holding that Brady evidence was material where other evidence was weak
• stating that imposing a due diligence requirement on defense counsel would “flip” the prosecutor’s obligation to disclose favorable evidence
• overruling a due diligence requirement by the defense and reasoning that prosecutors have a broad duty and obligation in disclosure
• overruling a due diligence requirement by the defense and reasoning that prosecutors have a broad duty and obligation in disclosure

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Randall Amado v. Terri Gonzalez

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Randall Amado v. Terri Gonzalez
  Ninth Circuit· 2013-10-30· cited 9×
• Randall Amado v. Terri Gonzalez
  Ninth Circuit· 2013-10-30
• Randall Amado v. Terri Gonzalez
  Ninth Circuit· 2014-07-11