No. 20-630
Benjamin Scott Brewer v. Tennessee
Response Waived
Tags: brady-v-maryland brady-violation criminal-procedure due-process evidence-tampering exculpatory-evidence forensic-evidence material-evidence state-misconduct
Latest Conference:
2020-12-11
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether this Court's ruling in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny entitle a defendant to the knowledge, before trial, that a state forensic agent contaminated the defendant's blood sample, where the contents of that sample were a crucial component of the state's case against that defendant.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether this Court's ruling in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny entitle a defendant to the knowledge, before trial, that a state forensic agent contaminated the defendant's blood sample, where the contents of that sample were a crucial component of the state's case against that defendant
Docket Entries
2020-12-14
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
2020-11-23
Waiver of right of respondent Tennessee to respond filed.
2020-11-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 10, 2020)
Attorneys
Benjamin Brewer
Tennessee
Nicholas White Spangler — Office of Tennessee Attorney General, Respondent