United States v. William Shaffer

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant’s undisclosed prior involvement in a state investigation contradicts his prior testimony and was material
• holding that facts implying agreement sufficient to require disclosure
• finding that the prosecution suppressed evidence by informing the defense of the existence of certain tapes but indicated that those tapes would be of “no value”
• finding materiality where the evidence impeached a witness whose credibility was vital to the outcome of the trial
• finding materiality where the evidence impeached a witness whose credibility was vital to the outcome of the trial
• finding suppression where government appraised defense counsel of the existence of certain tapes but also stated that those tapes would be of “no value”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).