Wade v. Brady

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Section 1983 claim seeking DNA testing of biological evidence was not barred under Heck
• finding post-conviction access to DNA testing to be guaranteed by a due process right “analogous to Brady, not a literal application of its pre-trial guarantee”
• noting the minimal impact on finality caused by mere testing and arguing that even attacking the judgment of conviction does not seriously harm finality when DNA evidence raises concerns about the accuracy of the initial verdict
• “[Section] 1983 is an entirely appropriate medium for plaintiff to raise his claim for access to DNA testing.”
• “[T]he same interest that motivated Brady — preventing wrongful conviction of the innocent — -still applies in the post-conviction setting....”
• “[T]he chance of reliable adjudication may decrease in a subsequent trial because the truth- finding value provided by new evidence is outweighed by the inevitable erosion of memory and dispersion of witnesses that happens over time.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).