Constitutional Provisions

Question 1

What are the 5 steps
of Preservation of Evidence as recommended by the FBI for collecting and preserving?

Answer 1

1) Obtaining it legally
2) Describing the evidence in detailed notes
3) Identifying it accurately and positively
4) Packaging it properly for identification, storage, or shipment to the laboratory; and;
5) Establishing and maintaining the chain of custody

Question 2

Disclosure of Evidence

Answer 2

giving it

Question 3

Arizona v. Youngblood (1988) Facts

Answer 3

Child accused one eyed man of kidnapping him and he was accused of being the kidnapper. He claimed that since the state failed to refrigerate the evidence (clothing) that could have been used to exonerate him

Question 4

Arizona v. Youngblood Rule

Answer 4

The Supreme Court held that where the evidence not preserved by the State might have been exculpatory, there is a Due Process violation only upon a showing of bad faith on the part of the police officers

Question 5

There is no constitutional duty to preserve evidence, only…what?

Answer 5

only a constitutional
prohibition against the bad faith destruction of
evidence that might have been exculpatory

Question 6

What is the Supreme Court standard for preservation of evidence? Is there an obligation? Are there consequences?

Answer 6

There is no constitutional duty to preserve evidence, but there is a constitutional prohibition against bad faith destruction of evidence that might have been exculpatory

Question 7

Is it a constitutional violation for prosecutors not to preserve evidence?

Answer 7

No, not unless done in bad faith

Question 8

Fifth and Fourteenth amendment clauses

Answer 8

No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without Due process

Question 9

Brady v. Maryland holding

Answer 9

the Supreme Court held that Due Process is violated where the prosecutor fails to disclose MATERIAL exculpatory evidence that the defendant SPECIFICALLY inquired about

Question 10

According to Brady, due process is violated where…?

Answer 10

• despite a defendant’s specific request
• evidence favorable to the defendant
• that is material as to guilt or punishment
• is suppressed by the prosecutor,
• irrespective of good or bad faith

Question 11

Giglio v. United States holding

Answer 11

the Supreme
Court later held that this duty to disclose covers
both exculpatory and impeachment evidence

the Supreme Court
also explained in that case that a prosecutor’s
office is a single entity. This means that the
government must disclose the required
information no matter which attorney in that office
has the information.

Question 12

Kyles v. Whitley holding

Answer 12

the Supreme Court
noted that prosecutors have a duty to learn of any
favorable evidence known to the others acting on
the government’s behalf in the case, including law
enforcement

Question 13

What happened in the 1970s?

Answer 13

the Supreme Court began to cut back on this body of law by defining the term “material” narrowly

Question 14

United States v. Bagley holding

Answer 14

held that evidence is
“material” only if there is a “reasonable probability”
that the result of the proceeding would have been
different had evidence been disclosed to defense

While this does not mean a preponderance of the
evidence (i.e. more likely than not) standard, it does
require a showing that this is a sufficient to
undermine confidence in the outcome

CURRENT FEDERAL COURTS TODAY

Question 15

What is the standard in Federal Courts today?

Answer 15

Bagley

evidence is
“material” only if there is a “reasonable probability”
that the result of the proceeding would have been
different had evidence been disclosed to defense

Question 16

US v. Agurs holding

Answer 16

the Court held that the scope of the
Brady duty to disclose material evidence depends
on the nature of the defendant’s request for such
information

Where the defendant has made a specific pre‐
trial request for disclosure of evidence, evidence
is “material” if it “might have affected the
outcome of trial.”

Under this standard, failure to disclose is
“seldom, if ever, excusable”

Where there has been only a general pre‐trial
request (or if the defendant has not made any
request), the prosecutor is required to disclose
evidence only if the evidence is of “obviously
exculpatory character.”

In such situations, evidence is “material”
only if it “only if the omitted evidence
would create reasonable doubt that did not
otherwise exist.”

Question 17

What is the current NY law about disclosing?

Answer 17

Agurs

Question 18

Ex-ante

Answer 18

backwards looking, good decision looking back

Question 19

Ex-post

Answer 19

forward looking, from that moment on this is the test that they are told to use. Basically, does it hold up looking forward

Question 20

What are the reasons for no constitutional mandate concerning discovery?

Answer 20

Higher stakes

Question 21

What does “fit” mean?

Answer 21

between your training/ knowledge and the issues in the case

match between expert and what they are testifying about

Question 22

What are the constitutional provisions that affect expert evidence?

Answer 22

Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and the due process clause

This requires courts to appoint an independent expert for indigent defendants under certain circumstances

Question 23

Judge’s power to get rid of any evidence (3 Steps)

Answer 23

Is it relevant? (Does it matter to the case/ relate to something in the case?)

Is it reliable? (Legislature hurdle)

Rule 403 (Judge’s power to get rid of evidence, “Substantially outweigh”)

Question 25

Material has multiple meanings, how do we look at it under Bagley?

Answer 25

Is it Relevant?
Is it Important (more recent understanding)?
Without it, would we lose faith in the conviction?

Question 25

What does material mean in Bagley?

Answer 25

Important

Question 26

What does the current federal standard (Bagley) require prosecutors to ask about materiality?

Answer 26

Is it favorable?

Will the jury’s confidence be undermined?