Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The bar against compulsory disclosure prior to the testimony of the witness whose statement is sought cannot be circumvented by resort to the Freedom of Information Act, [36] or Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. [37] It is left to the discretion of the trial court to determine whether Jencks material can be delivered before trial.
The United States District Court for the District of Maryland (in case citations, D. Md.) is the federal district court whose jurisdiction is the state of Maryland.Appeals from the District of Maryland are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (except for patent claims and claims against the U.S. government under the Tucker Act, which are appealed to the Federal ...
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).
Several federal agencies have adopted Jencks Act rules. Although the Jencks Act applies only to government agents or employees who testify in criminal cases, making these witnesses and relevant documents available for cross-examination after testimony, it has been applied in administrative law cases in the interests of justice and fair play. [62]
The Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963). [2] The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that might exonerate the defendant. [3]
In the classified documents case, Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges that he illegally kept highly sensitive records after he left office in 2021 and obstructed government efforts to retrieve ...
Rule 613. Witness's Prior Statement; Rule 614. Court's Calling or Examining a Witness; Rule 615. Excluding Witnesses; Opinions and Expert Testimony. Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses; Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses; Rule 703. Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony; Rule 704. Opinion on an Ultimate Issue; Rule 705.
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]