United States of America Ex Rel. Lawrence Smith, Cross v. James W. Fairman and Neil F. Hartigan, Cross-Appellees

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the prosecutor's ignorance of a police worksheet did not justify the State's failure to provide information
• noting that prosecutor’s ignorance of existence of favorable material does not justify the State’s failure to produce it, particularly when the “withheld evidence is under the control of a state instrumentality closely aligned with the prosecution”
• in a habeas case, the state’s attorney did not know that a ballistics officer had written an exculpatory report
• “Brady was aimed at ensuring that an accused receives a fair trial rather than punishing the prosecutor for failing to disclose exculpatory evidence”
• Brady violation when government failed to disclose ballistics worksheet that showed gun defendant was accused of firing was inoperable
• “We believe that the purposes of Brady would not be served by allowing material exculpatory evidence to be withheld simply because the police, rather than the prosecutors, are responsible for the nondisclosure.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).