Legal Opinion · Dissent

Miller v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided March 3, 2011No. 07-CF-1169Published

1DissentFisher, Associate Judge

When analyzing appellant’s claim that the government violated its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), it is important to keep two points firmly in mind. First, appellant does not deny that the videotape itself was disclosed in a timely fashion; he concedes that defense counsel “had received from the government, and carefully reviewed, Ryan Lindsey’s videotaped police statement.” Second, although he vigorously complains about the delayed disclosure of Taylor’s grand jury testimony, appellant made effective use of that transcript the very next…

2Cases cited52 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. Strickler v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  5. Cone v. BellSupreme Court of the United States · 2009

47 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