Criminal Cases: Case Study
Cases Summary
CJUS 350
Angela McIntosh
The three cases that are mentioned and studied are Brady v. Maryland, Giglio v. United States, and United States v. Agurs. These cases are important to the history of how cases are presented and with what evidence is made available to the jury. With Brady v. Maryland, it was the first time that the Supreme Court recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause is to ensure and guarantee that the criminal defendants are given all of the information that the prosecution or police have in their possession. With this case, Brady admitted during his murder trial that he had been involved in the crime but that the other individual that was involved in the case was the …show more content…
Agurs. This case is in reference as to if the due process clause requires a new trial when the government withholds exculpatory information from a criminal defendant. Agurs was a prostitute and she killed a customer by the last name of Sewell. Agurs attorney did not argue that she acted in self-defense after she was actually attacked by Sewell with a knife. After she was convicted her lawyer found out that Sewell had been convicted of assault and illegally carrying weapons. She in turn moved for a new trial stating that the prosecutor’s failure to provide Sewell’s record violated Brady. The trial judge denied the request but an appellate court ordered a new trial. The Supreme Court however reinstated her conviction. The Court rejected the prosecution’s argument that it is required to provide or disclose information only when it is specifically requested. The fact is that the prosecution is required to provide all exculpatory information even without a request from the defense. The Court however ruled that the failure to disclose this information to defense does not change the outcome of the case. This was due to the fact that the jury was aware that Sewell was carrying a knife, therefore the Court felt that the disclosure of his record would not have changed the outcome. This case is important because it shows the importance for the prosecution to disclose all exculpatory evidence without the request. It is …show more content…
It is so imperative to make sure that everything is out in the open with the cases not just for the prosecution’s standpoint but for the defense as well. The prosecution has a duty not just to the public but also to the defense to ensure that the trial is handled as fairly as possible. If it is not, then justice has not been
CJUS 350
Angela McIntosh
The three cases that are mentioned and studied are Brady v. Maryland, Giglio v. United States, and United States v. Agurs. These cases are important to the history of how cases are presented and with what evidence is made available to the jury. With Brady v. Maryland, it was the first time that the Supreme Court recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause is to ensure and guarantee that the criminal defendants are given all of the information that the prosecution or police have in their possession. With this case, Brady admitted during his murder trial that he had been involved in the crime but that the other individual that was involved in the case was the …show more content…
Agurs. This case is in reference as to if the due process clause requires a new trial when the government withholds exculpatory information from a criminal defendant. Agurs was a prostitute and she killed a customer by the last name of Sewell. Agurs attorney did not argue that she acted in self-defense after she was actually attacked by Sewell with a knife. After she was convicted her lawyer found out that Sewell had been convicted of assault and illegally carrying weapons. She in turn moved for a new trial stating that the prosecutor’s failure to provide Sewell’s record violated Brady. The trial judge denied the request but an appellate court ordered a new trial. The Supreme Court however reinstated her conviction. The Court rejected the prosecution’s argument that it is required to provide or disclose information only when it is specifically requested. The fact is that the prosecution is required to provide all exculpatory information even without a request from the defense. The Court however ruled that the failure to disclose this information to defense does not change the outcome of the case. This was due to the fact that the jury was aware that Sewell was carrying a knife, therefore the Court felt that the disclosure of his record would not have changed the outcome. This case is important because it shows the importance for the prosecution to disclose all exculpatory evidence without the request. It is …show more content…
It is so imperative to make sure that everything is out in the open with the cases not just for the prosecution’s standpoint but for the defense as well. The prosecution has a duty not just to the public but also to the defense to ensure that the trial is handled as fairly as possible. If it is not, then justice has not been