By Nikki Jepson
The process of discovery in both civil and criminal law involves investigating the evidence that the other party may present at trial. Under Rule 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), discovery is broadly defined. “Parties may obtain discovery regarding any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense.”²
In criminal law, evidence can be exculpatory or inculpatory. “Exculpatory evidence is evidence, such as a statement, tending to excuse, justify, or absolve the alleged fault or guilt of a defendant.”³ Another way to explain it would be exculpatory evidence consists of any evidence that is favorable to the defendant. Under what is known as the Brady Rule, named after Brady v. Maryland (1963), the prosecution is required to turn over any material exculpatory information in the government’s possession to the defense.⁴
However, from 1963 until 1985, the Brady rule was only applicable if the defendant made a pretrial request for specific information, which the prosecutor denied. In United States v. Bagley (1985), the Supreme Court expanded the Brady Rule by eliminating that requirement by stating, “the prosecution has a constitutional duty to disclose all material, favorable information in their possession to defendants regardless of whether it is requested.”⁴ When prosecutors are found to have violated Brady during the trial, it can result in a mistrial or prohibit the prosecution from using unfavorable evidence, which the exculpatory evidence may discredit.⁴ Today, most Brady violations are not caught or remedied until after an individual has been convicted and sent to prison.
To ensure due process of law, how important is the process of discovery? Is the sharing of information through the process of discovery the only way to ensure that each side receives a just outcome?
Sources:
¹M&H, Specialty Courts, pg. 157
³https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/exculpatory_evidence
⁴https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Brady_Rule
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985)
Your first question is difficult for me to answer in a way that isnt too subjective. Discovery's importance in lawsuits is like the foundation of a house, laying out the support, shape, plumbing and electricity the entire care will be built on. Each side needs to have a clear understanding of both their own evidences as well as their opposition in order to prepare their arguments and counterarguments against them.
ReplyDeleteSharing of information through the process of discovery certainly makes litigation, and hopefully, the rulings more fair than they would be without them. Just as you need a roof, walls, doors, etc for a safe home, the foundation of discovery plays a crucial part in fair rulings.
I would agree, and I suppose that is my point. However, in criminal cases before 1985, the prosecutor isn't required to hand everything over if they do not plan on presenting it in court. That fact alone makes you wonder whether more people have been convicted of crimes they did not commit. Murder cases get all the attention, and considering what is at stake, life & liberty, they should, but what about others who served their time and are now stuck with the repercussions of a felony conviction bestowed on individuals in our society.
DeleteIt seems as though discovery might not necessarily be the only way for parties to get a just outcome, but I honestly don't know a better way. It's seems like the best way for each party to disclose what information they have in order to build a case, or work toward settlement. I can't imagine either side being very forthcoming without this process in place. The historical background was interesting. Without prosecutors handing over all of their evidence and facts, really keeps the defense from being able to make much of a solid case and it does make you wonder how many cases would have benefitted from being able to have more transparency.
ReplyDeleteI agree, discovery certainly isn't the only way for parties to get a just outcome, however you are correct in not knowing a better way to at least strive to achieve it. There are certain rules of evidence in a criminal case that have always boggled my mind. You would think that a system of government that was founded on the principles of life, liberty, and property because their experienced oppression that sought to undermine those very principles would take great care in preserving those freedoms in a system in which even being accused has an incredible impact on those liberties. Thank you for your comment.
DeleteFrom what I learned - can remember from my undergrad, court proceedings are to be fact finding. You have the prosecution/plaintiff on one side and the defendant/accused on the other. Somewhere in the middle is the truth. Without honestly reviewing Brady v. Maryland and United States v. Bagley, I have to say that not sharing all information in discovery is against the Sixth A. If the evidence is accusing, then the accused should be able to confront that evidence. It should be noted that knowing or being able to confirm exactly how the evidence was obtained is as important as the evidence itself - fruit from the poisonous tree.
ReplyDeleteI kind of want to watch My Cousin Vinny now.
First, My Cousin Vinny is one of my all time favorite gotcha moments in cinema trial court proceedings!! Second, it was astounding to me to learn in my undergrad that the Bill of Rights did not begin to be applied to the states until some time after the 14th amendment was ratified. Hence, the incorporation doctrine. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine Third, I couldn't agree with you more on chain of custody when it comes to evidence. It is critically important to know through whose hands a piece of evidence passed. Whether it is scientific evidence, digital evidence, or any other kind of physical/tangible evidence. Thank you for your comment.
Delete