1. In an ATF sting operation, the government failed to disclose the
identity of the informant pretrial, and the defense was entrapment. The defense
discovered the informant's identity only three business days before trial, with no
time to do any investigation. The informant was allowed to testify at trial under
a phony name. Post-conviction it was revealed that the informant's testimony
about how he came to encounter the defendants was completely false and that
the government failed to disclose other critical impeachment evidence.
The question presented is this:
Does the government's suppression of an informant's identity and
impeachment evidence in a sting operation violate Rovario v. United States , 353
U.S. 53 (1957), Smith v. Illinois, 390 U.S. 129, 131 (1968), and Brady v.
Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963)?

2. After Rehaif v. United States , 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019), may the
governm ent prove a defendant violated 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (possession of
firearm by someone convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year in
prison) or § 922(d)(1) (sale to a prohibited person) merely by the statement that
one has a "felony" conviction when the words "felon" or "felony" do not appear
anywhere in the statutes?

Does the government's suppression of an informant's identity and impeachment evidence in a sting operation violate Rovario v. United States, Smith v. Illinois, and Brady v. Maryland?