From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Kenner

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Dec 16, 2005
917 So. 2d 1081 (La. 2005)

Opinion

No. 2005-KP-1052.

December 16, 2005.

In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, Nos. 327-373; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2004-KA-1809.


Writ granted; the rulings of the courts below are vacated. Because the state makes a substantial showing that relator received the 1988 crime lab report before he entered his guilty plea, this Court remands the case to the district court to reconsider its conclusion that the state's withholding of exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), vitiated the voluntariness of relator's pleas entered under North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970). See State ex rel. Tassin v. Whitley, 602 So.2d 721, 722 (La. 1992) ("When there is a factual issue of significance that is sharply contested," court should hold a hearing). In connection with its ruling, the district court should consider whether relator's equal or greater access to his own blood for testing and determining secretor status diminishes the significance of the state's failure, assuming that it occurred, to disclose a 1987 crime lab report prepared in an unrelated case indicating relator's secretor status. See State v. Hobley, 99-3343, p. 25 n. 10 (La. 12/8/99), 752 So.2d 771, 786 ("`There is no Brady violation where a defendant knew or should have known the essential facts permitting him to take advantage of any exculpatory information, or where the evidence is available from another source, because in such cases there is really nothing for the government to disclose.'") (quoting Coe v. Bell, 161 F.3d 320, 344 (6th Cir. 1998)); see generally United States v. Newman, 849 F.2d 156, 161 (5th Cir. 1988) (government is not obligated to furnish defendant with information he already has or can obtain with reasonable diligence); United States v. Miranne, 688 F.2d 980, 987 (5th Cir. 1982) ("Under Brady, the government is not obligated to furnish a defendant with information which he already has.").

TRAYLOR and WEIMER, JJ., concur.

JOHNSON, J., would deny the writ.


Summaries of

State v. Kenner

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Dec 16, 2005
917 So. 2d 1081 (La. 2005)
Case details for

State v. Kenner

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Louisiana v. Christopher KENNER

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana

Date published: Dec 16, 2005

Citations

917 So. 2d 1081 (La. 2005)

Citing Cases

State v. Wilhite

The state's constitutional obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence does not relieve the defense of its…

State v. Wilhite

The state's constitutional obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence does not relieve the defense of its…