Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the prosecution's failure to inform the jury that a witness had been promised not to be prosecuted in exchange for his testimony was a failure to fulfill the duty to present all material evidence to the jury, and constituted a violation of due process, requiring a new trial. [1]
In California, there is a carefully prescribed procedure governing such request, and making disclosure without an order is a crime. The statutory scheme was developed, in part, because law enforcement departments had developed a practice of purging their files concerning misconduct claims made against their officers. [20]
May 7—Gouldsboro's police chief is resigning after he said a report questioning his credibility as a witness was sent to the Hancock County District Attorney's office. John Shively's last day is ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States, the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty (exculpatory evidence).
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Notes prepared by law enforcement agents of an interview with a potential government witness may be subject to production under the Jencks Act, provided the witness testifies at the trial. Some government practices have led to the destruction of such notes prior to any trial. This is not, of itself, considered to be bad faith. [100] [101]
When I began my career as an assistant state attorney in 1991, jurors universally respected and believed in the credibility of law enforcement, thus according their testimony more weight. Today ...