Opinion
CR No. 16-1701 JCH
03-21-2019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. AARON MERCADO-GRACIA, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On March 5, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion for Disclosure of Brady and Giglio Material (ECF No. 198). Defendant seeks disclosure of all Brady and Giglio material as it refers to the alleged coconspirator of Defendant, Favian Reyes, and he enumerates twelve categories of requested evidence. The United States opposes the motion because it asserts it has complied with its obligations and has no additional Brady and Giglio material to disclose.
The Supreme Court held in Brady "that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution." Brady, 373 U.S. at 87. To establish a Brady violation, the defendant must show that (1) the prosecution suppressed evidence; (2) the evidence was favorable to the accused; and (3) the evidence was material to the defense. United States v. Beers, 189 F.3d 1297, 1303 (10th Cir. 1999). Brady only requires disclosure of information in the government's possession or of which it has knowledge, whether actual or constructive. Id. at 1304. Impeachment evidence affecting a witness's credibility falls under Brady when the reliability of a given witness may be determinative of a defendant's guilt or innocence. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154 (1972).
The Government has stated that it does not intend to call Mr. Reyes as a witness, so Giglio is not at issue. The United States has disclosed some material pertaining to Mr. Reyes on July 31, 2018, but it asserts that it has no Giglio or Brady materials to provide Defendant. As Defendant acknowledges, this Court's standing discovery order already requires the disclosure of Brady and Giglio material, and thus, a separate order compelling the disclosure of any evidence subject to Brady is not necessary. The Government should liberally construe its Brady and Giglio obligations when viewing the exculpatory and impeachment value of material in its possession. See United States v. Johnson, 581 F.3d 320, 331 (6th Cir. 2009) (explaining that the duty to disclose Brady material "extends to impeachment evidence, but only if the evidence is favorable to the accused in the sense that it would allow him to impeach government witnesses").
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Disclosure of Brady and Giglio Material (ECF No. 198) is DENIED.
/s/ _________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE