Opinion ID: 1431566
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: disclosure of deceased's arrest records

Text: Before trial, appellant moved for disclosure of deceased's arrest records in order to secure names of witnesses who could be called to testify as to deceased's character for violence and aggression. The trial court denied this motion and a subsequent request for an in camera inspection of the records. Appellant now contends that the court's action constituted judicial suppression of exculpatory evidence; and the prosecutor's failure to provide these records sua sponte constituted a violation of his affirmative duty to provide favorable evidence under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). Once the defense makes a pretrial Brady motion, the duty to determine the merits of the request for disclosure falls solely on the court. See People v. Andre W., 44 N.Y.2d 179, 404 N.Y.S.2d 578, 375 N.E.2d 758, 761 (1978). U.S. v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 106, 96 S.Ct. 2392, 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976), encourages submitting the problem (of disclosure) to the trial judge. We find no merit in appellant's contention that the prosecutor's duty to disclose continues despite determination by the court. Applying the standards set in Brady and Agurs to the present case, the ultimate question to be decided is whether appellant was denied a fair trial because the trial court suppressed materials favorable to his claim of self-defense. For reasons previously expressed in this opinion, we hold that none of the testimonies of witnesses in the arrest records to show that deceased acted in conformity with a known character trait were admissible during trial, either as corroboration of appellant's state of mind or to show that deceased was the aggressor. Consequently, there was no favorable evidence constitutionally required to be disclosed. We find no error, constitutional or otherwise, in any of the trial court's determination. Other issues raised on appeal are without merit. Judgment affirmed.