The Criminal Justice System in Its Environment

Disciplinary Assignment: The Criminal Justice System in Its Environment
Name
University
CJUS 520
Professor
December 8, 2022
Memorandum-Part 1
TO: Recipient Name
FROM: _____
DATE: November 13, 2022
SUBJECT:
Main Issues: Brady v. Maryland U.S. 83 (1963)
In this hearing within the Maryland Court, the judges made their ruling based on the presented facts material to the case and the United States constitution. However, the court questioned the admissibility of the tabled evidence as the petitioner, and their crime partner faced first-degree murder charges and was accorded capital punishment. In this case, the petitioner accepted to having committed the offense, indicating that his crime partner was the one that committed the real killing. Based on this account, the judges and the complainant’s attorney accepted that the complainant was liable to be held guilty for the offense relating the first-degree murder and requested only that the judges make a ruling that is devoid of capital punishment. During this hearing, the claimant’s jury lobbied the prosecutor to let him evaluate the mate’s extrajudicial sentiments. A great deal of these were turned over to him, but the prosecution withheld the one in which the mate admitted to having committed the actual murder and was not brought to the petitioner’s knowledge until after his trial, conviction, and sentencing, as well as after the Maryland Court of Appeals had affirmed his conviction. In a proceeding following the conviction, the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the prosecutor’s act to suppress the evidence undermined the petitioner’s due process of the law (Brockway, 2013). It remanded the case for a fresh trial regarding the punishment question instead of the guilt question because they believed that nothing within the repressed confession “could have undermined [petitioner’s] offense under the killing in the first degree” (Brockway, 2013). It was held that the petitioner was not denied the constitutional right when their fresh trial was constrained to the punishment question, and the judgment was affirmed. Suppression via the prosecution of favorable evidence to the defendant who had lobbied it undermines due process in contexts where evidence remains material to punishment or guilty, irrespective of the prosecution’s bad faith or good faith. The decision by the Court of Appeals to restrict the petitioner’s fresh trial to the punishment question did not violate their due process right or equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment because the suppressed evidence was admissible solely on the punishment issue (Crump, 2016). The U.S. Supreme Court rules that suppressing evidence that could tilt the case in favor of the defendant upon request violates Amendment Fourteen’s due process mandate. This is because the evidence was material to punishment or guilt, irrespective of whether the government concealed it in bad or good faith. Evidence suppression violated Brady’s right to due process and, thus, the opportunity for the subsequent trial.
Main Issues: Giglio v. United States U.S. 150 (1972)
When trials relate to one individual’s testimony against another, the jud...