This case poses a pressing issue of national importance. Did the Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals impose an improper and unduly burdensome standard over Petitioner's "Brady" claims and his ability to present evidence of such claims; more specifically:

A. Whether a "Brady" violation requires suppression to be dependent upon possession?

B. Whether a trial (lower) court errs and deprives an (indigent) defendant of due process in denying without an evidentiary hearing to produce the requisite evidence that would warrant a new trial, a motion for leave and motion for new trial, a civil rule 60(B) motion, when a defendant demonstrates a new trial is warranted?

Whether a Brady violation requires suppression to be dependent upon possession