Document Type
Article
Publication Date
January 2018
First Page
87
Abstract
Under the current state of the law, there is no mechanism in place to ensure that a criminal defendant receives information in the exclusive possession of the government that negates guilt, undermines the strength of the government's case, or reduces the sentence that could be imposed. Whenever a prosecutor wants to do so, she can suppress this favorable information and prevent the court and the defense from ever learning of its existence. Without oversight and with very little accountability, prosecutors have been vested with the power to determine whether and when to disclose favorable evidence to the defense. Although many prosecutors diligently comply with the constitutional disclosure duty mandated by Brady v. Maryland, for a wide variety of reasons, others do not, or do not do so invariably. Every year, there are numerous reported opinions where the court finds that a prosecutor has failed to disclose favorable information to the defense. As one scholar has noted, "violations of Brady are the most recurring and pervasive of all constitutional procedural violations.
Recommended Citation
Cynthia Jones,
Here Comes the Judge: A Model for Judicial Oversight and Regulation of the Brady Disclosure Duty,
Hofstra Law Review
87
(2018).
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/facsch_lawrev/556