What to do if the Court withholds favorable evidence?

I am asked all the time about “Brady Material” and what is a “Brady Violation” There was a recent case that discussed “Brady” so I am taking the opportunity to write about it.
In the case of Jefferson v. United States Court of Appeals, the defendant claimed that there was misconduct by the prosecutor for violating Brady v. Maryland obligations. Specifically, the defendant claims that the prosecutor hid plea agreements and sentencing records of the cooperating witnesses.
In order for the petitioner or defendant to successfully argue a Brady claim the petitioner must successfully show that, “… (1) The withheld evidence was favorable to the
petitioner, (2) the evidence was suppressed by the government, and (3) the petitioner suffered prejudice.” Jells v. Mitchell, 538 F .3d 478.
The United States Court of Appeals ultimately affirmed with the district court that decided this case, because the defendant either failed to demonstrate the existence of an undisclosed agreement or failed to meet the prejudice requirements of the Brady test. Further the U.S. Court of Appeals notes that, in this case if suppression of evidence results in constitutional error, that reason is due to the character of the evidence despite the suggested egregious prosecutorial misconduct that may have taken place in this case.


Contact The Firm: 269.373.5430