Legal Opinion

Byrd v. Owen

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 2, 2000No. S00A1062PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Sears, Justice.

The habeas court granted relief to petitioner/appellee Jeffrey Owen after it was revealed that the prosecution failed to disclose an immunity agreement with its main witness at trial. We conclude that the habeas court’s grant of relief was proper. For approximately 13 years, the State failed to disclose its immunity agreement with its primary trial witness, despite its obligation of disclosure under Brady v. Maryland 1 and Giglio v. United States. 2 Our review of the recorded proceedings in the trial and habeas courts leads us to conclude that: (1) if the State’s immunity…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Watson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2002
  2. Waldrip v. HeadSupreme Court of Georgia · 2005
  3. State v. LamplSupreme Court of Georgia · 2015
  4. Hood v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2021
  5. Clemons v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2004

8 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