Legal Opinion

In Re Attorney C

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 13, 2002No. 01SA19PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kourlis

This case involves an important issue of first impression: namely, what are the parameters of a prosecutor's ethical duty to disclose exculpatory material to the defense under Colo. RPC 8.8(d)? We hold that Rule 8.8(d) requires prosecutors to disclose exeul-patory evidence to the defense in advance of any critical stage of the proceeding. The respondent 1 in these proceedings did not do so. However, we also hold that a prosecutor violates Rule 8.8(d) only if he or she acts intentionally. In this case, the hearing board did not find that the respondent acted intentionally. Therefore, we…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  5. Coleman v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. In Re RooseSupreme Court of Colorado · 2003
  2. In re Attorney F.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2012
  3. In Re FisherSupreme Court of Colorado · 2009
  4. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota v. FelandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
  5. People v. CorsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 2016

33 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