It is suggested that most lawyers and perhaps judges should subscribe to the Annual Review of Criminal Procedure contained in the Georgetown Law Journal. This includes every case decided by the Courts of Appeal each year. It details how said courts have handled the Brady obligation. As well, the Library of Congress prepares an extraordinary treatise, available from the Superintendent of Documents entitled “The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation.” This contains every case since the founding of our nation, including the Brady obligation and its progeny. The experience of this author with Brady issues is explained somewhat in the book The Courtroom is My Theater (Post Hill Press 2018). See also www.JayGoldberg.com.
What prompts this article is the absolutely brilliant decision by District Judge Allison J. Nathan (U.S.D.J., S.D.N.Y.) in the case of United States v. Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, 18-cr-224 (AJN), decided June 9, 2020, and the judge’s earlier decision in United States v. Pizarro, 17-cr-151 (AJN). These cases demonstrate quite clearly that the judge, in our opinion, “gets it” with respect to the obligation imposed on the government by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
