No. 22-6984

Ciaran Paul Redmond v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-03-10
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: brady-v-maryland brady-violation criminal-procedure diligence-requirement due-process exculpatory-evidence legal-diligence procedurally-unrelated-case prosecutorial-disclosure unpublished-case
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2023-03-31
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Whether, to establish a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), a defendant must show that his attorney could not have obtained the undisclosed exculpatory evidence through his own diligence.

2. To the extent that there is some type of diligence requirement, what is the applicable level of diligence and does it foreclose a Brady violation where the undisclosed exculpatory documents were filed in an unpublished and procedurally unrelated case decided several years earlier.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a defendant must show that his attorney could not have obtained undisclosed exculpatory evidence through diligence

Docket Entries

2023-04-03
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/31/2023.
2023-03-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-03-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 10, 2023)

Attorneys

Ciaran Paul Redmond
Benjamin Lee ColemanBenjamin L. Coleman Law PC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent