Disciplinary research paper
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Ivy Tech Community College, Indianapolis *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
301
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by hoodfaith88
Disciplinary Assignment: Environment of the Criminal Justice System
1
Disciplinary Assignment: Environment of the Criminal Justice System Faith Hood
Liberty University
CJUS 520
10/08/2023
Disciplinary Assignment: Environment of the Criminal Justice System
2
Memorandum-Part 1 TO: Whom it may concern
FROM: Faith Hood DATE: 10/08/2023
SUBJECT: Main Issues: Brady v. Maryland
U.S. 83 (1963) The main issue was whether the prosecution's suppression of evidence that is favorable to
the defendant violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The prosecution's suppression of evidence that is material to either the guilt or punishment of a criminal defendant violates the defendant's constitutional right to due process. (Dybdahl, 2023) John Brady and Charles Boblit were convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to death in Maryland. At Brady's trial, he testified that he participated in the robbery but not the murder, and Boblit did the actual killing.
However, the prosecution did not disclose to Brady that Boblit had previously confessed to the murder. After Brady's conviction, he learned of Boblit's confession and appealed. The Maryland Court of Appeals held that the suppression of the confession denied Brady due process
and remanded the case for a new trial of the question of punishment, but not the question of guilt.
The Supreme Court held that the prosecution's suppression of evidence that is material to either guilt or punishment of a criminal defendant violates the defendant's constitutional right to due process. The Court reasoned that the prosecution has a duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense because the defendant has a right to a fair trial. The Court also held that the defendant need not prove prejudice in order to establish a Brady violation.
Disciplinary Assignment: Environment of the Criminal Justice System
3
Main Issues: Giglio v. United States
U.S. 150 (1972)
The Main Issue was whether a new trial is required when the prosecution fails to disclose evidence of a witness's impeachment material to the defense. A new trial is required when the prosecution fails to disclose evidence of a witness's impeachment material to the defense, even if the defendant cannot show that the evidence would have changed the outcome of the trial.
Anthony Giglio was convicted of passing counterfeit bills. The prosecution failed to disclose to Giglio that the government's key witness, Eugene Valente, had been promised leniency in his own criminal case in exchange for his testimony against Giglio. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review Giglio's conviction. The Supreme Court held that a new trial is required when the prosecution fails to disclose evidence of a witness's impeachment material to the defense, even if the defendant cannot show that the evidence would have changed the outcome of the trial. The Court reasoned that the defendant has a right to know of any evidence that could affect the credibility of a witness against him. (Staff, 2015)
Main Issues: United States v. Agurs
U.S 97 (1976)
Whether the prosecution's failure to disclose evidence to the defense violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The prosecution's failure to disclose evidence to the defense violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment only if the defendant can show that the evidence was material, and that the prosecution suppressed the evidence in bad faith. Jerry Agurs was convicted of murder in the first degree. The prosecution failed to disclose to Agurs that a witness had identified another man as the
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Disciplinary Assignment: Environment of the Criminal Justice System
4
perpetrator of the crime. Agurs appealed his conviction, arguing that the prosecution's failure to disclose the evidence violated his due process rights.
The Supreme Court held that the prosecution's failure to disclose evidence to the defense violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment only if the defendant can show that the evidence was material, and that the prosecution suppressed the evidence in bad faith. The
Court reasoned that the prosecution has a duty to disclose material evidence to the defense, but that duty is not absolute. The Court also held that the defendant must prove prejudice in order to establish a Brady violation.
In conclusion, Brady v. Maryland, Giglio v. United States, and United States v. Agurs are
important Supreme Court cases that define the prosecution's duty to disclose evidence to the defense. These cases establish that the prosecution must disclose all material evidence, even if the evidence is exculpatory or impeaching. The prosecution must also disclose evidence in good faith. If the prosecution fails to disclose material evidence, the defendant may be entitled to a new trial.
Disciplinary Assignment: Environment of the Criminal Justice System
5
References
Dybdahl, T. L. (2023). When Innocence is not enough: Hidden evidence and the failed promise of the brady rule
. The New Press. Hoffmann, J. L., & Stuntz, W. J. (2017). Defining crimes
. Wolters Kluwer. KJV Bible: King James Version: Youversion
. YouVersion | The Bible App | Bible.com. (n.d.). https://www.bible.com/versions/1-kjv-king-james-version Linebach, J. E., Kovaciss, L., Hanigan, M., & Spencer, J. (2022). Psychology in the justice system
. Verisega Books LLC. Staff, P. E. (2015). High Court case summaries, criminal procedure (keyed to saltzburg, 10th)
. West Academic. Than, D. C. (2019). Human rights
. Pearson Education Limited.