Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Can Prosecutors Bluff? Brady V. Maryland And Plea Bargaining, John G. Douglass
Can Prosecutors Bluff? Brady V. Maryland And Plea Bargaining, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
The author discusses the symbolic value of the Brady rule in the pretrial context in the U.S. criminal justice system. Brady's symbolic power remains stronger than its corrective power in post-trial motions. It serves as a constitutional reminder to prosecutors because they cannot serve as architects of unfairness. Most prosecutors disclose more Brady material in pretrial discovery than the constitutional rule actually demands. This indicates that prosecutors can bluff.
Accuracy Where It Matters: Brady V. Maryland In The Plea Bargaining Context, Corinna Barrett Lain
Accuracy Where It Matters: Brady V. Maryland In The Plea Bargaining Context, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
Professor Lain argues that the role of Brady v. Maryland in protecting the innocent from wrongful conviction is just as essential in the plea bargaining context as it is at trial, and that therefore even defendants who plead guilty should be entitled to Brady's protections. However, she concludes that Brady's application in the plea bargaining context is destined to provide only a shadow of the protection Brady provides at trial because of the materiality standard currently used to judge post-plea Brady claims. In making both points, she employs a model of the plea bargaining defendant's decision-making process, using modern choice …
Fatal Attraction? The Uneasy Courtship Of Brady And Plea Bargaining, John G. Douglass
Fatal Attraction? The Uneasy Courtship Of Brady And Plea Bargaining, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
Part I of this Article discusses the natural attraction between Brady-a rule requiring disclosure of evidence favorable to a defendant-and plea bargaining-a practice where such information is at a premium for defendants. Part II describes how an increasing number of courts have adapted Brady to fit in the world of a plea bargain, in the process changing Brady's point of reference from the jury's verdict to the defendant's tactical decision to plead guilty. Part ill argues that this change in focus narrows Brady's substantive coverage and renders the rule practically unenforceable following most guilty pleas. Part IV then assesses the …