Opinion ID: 3157592
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to Produce Brady Material

Text: The second Brady prong is whether the state failed to produce the favorable Weeks evidence to the defense. Although it does not matter whether the failure was willful or inadvertent, Brady, 373 U.S. at 87, after completing his exhaustive review of the evidence and trial record and after assessing the credibility of witnesses at the September 2012 hearing, the master found that the state deliberately failed to produce the favorable Weeks evidence to Mr. Clemons. The master “believed Weeks when he testified that he recorded his observations of Clemons on the Pretrial Release Form.” The master concluded that the pretrial release form completed by Mr. Weeks had been altered and, while it was uncertain exactly who had crossed out the description of Mr. Clemons’ injury, “it had to be someone who had [done] it on behalf of the state.” The master found that there was no indication that the state ever informed the defense of Mr. Weeks’ recorded observations or of his oral statements of those observations, noting at the very least, even in the absence of the pretrial release form, Mr. Clemons could have called Mr. Weeks as a witness at trial to provide oral testimony of his observations of Mr. Clemons’ injury. Based on these determinations, the master concluded that Mr. Clemons has, indeed, satisfied the second element of Brady by proving that the state suppressed the Weeks evidence from the defense. Due to the master’s unique ability to view and judge the credibility of witnesses, this Court will uphold the master’s findings and conclusions so long as they are supported by substantial evidence. In light of the master’s credibility determination, this Court’s 39 deference to that determination, and the evidence showing that the state intentionally took steps to hide Mr. Weeks’ corroborative testimony from Mr. Clemons by attempting to convince Mr. Weeks to change his report to prevent further reporting of Mr. Clemons’ injury; altering his record of the injury on the pretrial release form; and failing to disclose the Weeks evidence to Mr. Clemons, this Court adopts the master’s findings and conclusions that Mr. Clemons satisfied the second prong of Brady.