Yes, Brady includes witness credibility claims.
Yes, Brady includes witness credibility claims:
Real quick: what is Brady material? It’s basically evidence that could have helped Defendant, but the People failed to disclose. Nooooooooooo, that doesn’t happen, right? Our Justice System would NEVER allow for that to happen, right? Well, here come’da Judges.
This March 7, 2016 US Supreme Court case Wearry v. Cain, 136 S.Ct. 1002, shows Brady is alive and well. Defendant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. Well, we can rest assured knowing he got a fair fight, right? Not so much. After trial, we find out the People failed to disclose:
- Two fellow inmate overheard statements about a large witness for the People: Mr. Scott, who testified for the People and while incarcerated two years later contacted authorities. These statements against Scott where that 1) he wanted to make sure Defendant “gets the needle cause [sic] he jacked over me.” And 2) that Scott told another inmate that lying would help Large Witness “get out of jail.”
- Another main witness who “had twice sought a deal to reduce his existing sentence in exchange for testifying against” Defendant.
- Medical records that would invalidate a Prosecution witness, Brown. Brown testified he ran across the street, pulled Victim out a car, pushed Victim into a cargo space, and then crawled into the cargo space with Victim. However, Brown’s med records showed he had knee surgery nine days prior to this supposed heavy lifting and shifting.
“[T]he only evidence directly tying [Defendant] to that crime was Scott’s dubious testimony, corroborated by the similarly suspect testimony of Brown.”
For Brady, it matters not whether the People acted in good or bad faith, but only if the evidence “is material either to guilt or to punishment.” Brady applies to evidence undermining witness credibility, and Defendant doesn’t even need to show that he ‘”more likely than not’ would have been acquitted had the new evidence been admitted.”
“Even if the jury—armed with all of this new evidence—could have voted to convict [Defendant], we have ‘no confidence that it would have done so.’” With this, Defendant wins a consolation prize of a new trial.
About the author, San Diego DUI lawyer Eric Ganci:
I am an owner and DUI lawyer in San Diego with my own firm Ganci, Esq., A Professional Corporation. I am trained in blood testing for drugs and alcohol, trained on breath testing, and trained to train police on field sobriety tests. I have authored Thomson West Publications regarding DUI science and law, and am a founding member of the DUI Lawyers Association, a national group.
I am recognized, after completing the required coursework and passing the certification exam, as a Lawyer-Scientist by the American Chemical Society, Chemistry and the Law division. I have been fortunate to be awarded many other awards, and you can see my full bio here.
I received my JD from Thomas Jefferson School of Law, my BA in Music Education from Northern Illinois University, and graduated from the Trial Lawyers College in 2013.
I have offices in San Diego and Vista (North County San Diego), and I represent persons arrested for DUI in all counties in San Diego.
On the side, I am a drummer with my San Diego live band karaoke group, Rock Out Karaoke, and have earned several musical accomplishments, such as opening for Anthrax and having Ving Rhames say “I like your band’s cd.”
Also, per California Rules of Professional Conduct, I must say this blog may be seen as a solicitation. Although I try to simply make them informative and entertaining, some persons may take it as a legal solicitation. It’s not, and it does not in any way form any kind of attorney-client relationship with whoever reads it.
Eric Ganci, Esq., DUI trial lawyer
GANCI, ESQ., APC
110 West C St, Ste 712
San Diego CA 92101
North County office:
950 Vista Village Dr
Vista, CA 92084
He earned his JD from Thomas Jefferson School of Law and his BA in Music Education from Northern Illinois University.
Latest posts by Eric Ganci (see all)
- Prosecutor threatening Defendant with perjury for testifying…is that improper? - September 11, 2019
- More case law whether Mental Health Diversion is retroactive: People v. Burns - August 26, 2019
- Does a warrantless blood draw on an unconscious DUI suspect violate the 4th Amendment? Mitchell v. Wisconsin - August 21, 2019