Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Caughron

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 1993Published

1DissentDaughtrey, Justice

I believe that this case should be remanded for a new trial because of unwarranted interference with the defendant’s right to due process — by the police, by the prosecution, and by the trial court. Hence, I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion.

The majority’s recapitulation of the evidence in this case demonstrates that the testimony of the defendant’s teenaged accomplice, April Ward, was not only crucial to the state’s case against Gary Caughron, it was the state’s case against him. The FBI developed no forensic evidence implicating Caughron, despite extensive testing on…

2Cases cited53 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Baxter v. RoseTennessee Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Weatherford v. BurseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977

48 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