Opinion ID: 1012703
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Reward Money

Text: Following Chandler’s conviction, Wilson received half of a $5,000 reward offered by the Governor of North Carolina for information related to Poore’s murder. The reward was publicized by a proclamation, which stated in relevant part that the payment of this reward or any portion thereof is conditional upon the information being furnished as a direct result of the issuance of this proclamation. J.A. 247. Chandler argues that the State had a duty to provide the proclamation to defense counsel because it was express evidence of an inducement for Mr. Wilson to embellish or fabricate his testimony.9 Appellant’s Br. at 45-46. The proclamation is a public document that could have been discovered by Chandler’s counsel through the exercise of reasonable diligence. Therefore, the State was under no duty to disclose the proclamation. See United States v. Kelly, 35 F.3d 929, 937 (4th Cir. 1994). 9 Because the MAR court did not address this claim, we conduct de novo review. 12 CHANDLER v. LEE