Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Lemons v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided February 25, 1992No. 0327-90-3Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDuff, J.

I concur with the majority’s position regarding the statements given by Gunn, Smith and Dungee. No specific evidence in this record establishes that those statements contained exculpatory material. However, these individuals were present at the shooting and a plausible argument can be advanced that if Murray saw shooters other than the defendant, then Gunn, Smith, and Dungee also may well have witnessed the event. Under the present state of the law, such a possibility does not “constitute a substantial basis” for claiming materiality exists and, accordingly, no reversible error exists based…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Cherricks v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1990
  3. LeMond v. McElroySupreme Court of Virginia · 1990
  4. Walker v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1987
  5. White v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API