Opinion ID: 2264062
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 25

Heading: Ayers's Statement

Text: The defendant also argues that the state's failure to reveal the fact that Ayers had given a statement to police in reference to another criminal prosecution constitutes reversible error. [12] According to Ayers's testimony at the posttrial hearing on defendant's motion for new trial, Ayers's 1999 statement to police indicated that a fellow inmate told Ayers that he had accidentally knocked a child down the stairs. We are not satisfied that the state's failure to divulge this fact violates Rule 16 or Brady because defendant cross-examined Ayers at trial in great detail about his attempts to cooperate with the state in exchange for favorable treatment. Ayers testified that he wrote multiple letters to the Attorney General offering his cooperation. For example, Ayers admitted that he offered to testify against a drug acquaintance, with whom he had committed a crime. [13] Counsel for defendant went as far as equating Ayers with Judas. Thus, defendant effectively cross-examined Ayers on his cooperation with the state. Furthermore, Ayers's statement in the other case was not material to this case in that, even with that information, the jury still would have convicted defendant. Accordingly, the failure of the state to divulge the fact that Ayers gave a statement in another criminal case, in this instance, does not rise to a violation of either Rule 16 or Brady. 5