Victor Manuel Martinez v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence was material even if it “were held to be hearsay and not admissible” because “it at least would have provided the defense the ability to contact the appropriate” people to gather the evidence in admissible form
• \That the prosecutor was personally unaware of the existence of the rap sheet does not excuse his misrepresentation to the trial court that a rap sheet was unavailable\
• “The duty to produce requested evidence falls on the state; there is no suggestion in Brady that different „arms‟ of the government are severable entities[,]” citing United States v. Deutsch, 475 F.2d 55, 57 (5th Cir. 1973
• “If the [suppressed] rap sheet were held to be hearsay and not admissible to prove the [state’s witness’s] prior convictions, it at least would have provided the defense the ability to contact the appropriate penal facilities to acquire an official record which would have been admissible.”
• “If the [suppressed] rap sheet were held to be hearsay and not admissible to prove the [state’s witness’s] prior convictions, it at least would have provided the defense the ability to contact the appropriate penal facilities to acquire an official record which would have been admissible.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).