§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.Mark Garrett, Respondent.

Brief

43 Cited authorities

  1. Kyles v. Whitley

    514 U.S. 419 (1995)   Cited 7,252 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense

  2. Brady v. Maryland

    373 U.S. 83 (1963)   Cited 43,295 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the prosecution violates due process when it suppresses material, favorable evidence

  3. Giglio v. United States

    405 U.S. 150 (1972)   Cited 12,144 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prosecution must disclose all information or material that may be used to impeach the credibility of prosecution witnesses where witness's credibility is "an important issue in the case"

  4. People v. Gissendanner

    48 N.Y.2d 543 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 736 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Gissendanner, the court reviewed a lower court's denial of a defendant's request to issue a subpoena for the police personnel files of prosecution witnesses.

  5. People v. Vilardi

    76 N.Y.2d 67 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 343 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Comparing the state law standard — whether there was a "reasonable possibility" that withheld evidence could have affected the result of the proceeding — to the federal standard of "reasonable probability"

  6. People v. Ennis

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9007 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 164 times
    In People v. Ennis, 11 N.Y. 3d 403, 410 [2008J, the Court recognized the general context in which conflict claims arise, stating "To date, our conflict of interest cases have generally fallen into one of two categories: cases where a potential conflict of interest was identified based on defense counsel's previous or concurrent representation of a client whose interests conflicted with those of defendant and cases where defense counsel became a witness against defendant" (internal citations omitted).

  7. People v. Fuentes

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 2646 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 157 times
    Applying the "reasonable probability" standard to a Brady violation in certain circumstances

  8. United States v. Gil

    297 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2002)   Cited 183 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a showing that a regulated activity substantially affects interstate commerce is not needed when Congress regulates activity defined by the first two Lopez categories

  9. People v. Kelly

    62 N.Y.2d 516 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 299 times
    Applying New York rule, which parallels federal rule; concluding that dismissal was an abuse of discretion where adverse inference instruction would have adequately remedied prejudice caused by government's destruction of evidence

  10. United States v. LeRoy

    687 F.2d 610 (2d Cir. 1982)   Cited 308 times
    Holding that the Government is not required to disclose grand jury testimony to a defendant who is "on notice of the essential facts which would enable him to call the witness and thus take advantage of any exculpatory testimony that he might furnish." United States v. Stewart, 513 F.2d 957, 960 (2d Cir. 1975)

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 485,423 times   688 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation