Summary
Brady v. Maryland and its progeny do not impose a general duty upon a prosecutor to listen to all recordings of inmate telephone calls held by the county telecommunications provider to search for exculpatory evidence for a defendant if the prosecutor would not do so otherwise.|Brady v. Maryland imposes a duty to discover whether the investigators and employees who listen to recorded inmate telephone calls find evidence favorable to a defendant in the recordings and, if so, to disclose that evidence to the defendant.|Brady v. Maryland imposes a duty upon the prosecutor to discover whether the investigators and employees who listen to recorded inmate telephone calls find evidence favorable to a defendant in the recordings and, if so, to disclose that evidence to the defendant.|A contract that provides a criminal district attorney's office with unfettered access to inmate telephone call recordings would likely be considered by a court as evidence in support of the criminal district attorney's office having possession, custody, or control of the recordings.|A contract that provides a criminal district attorney's office with unfettered access to inmate telephone call recordings would likely be considered by a court as evidence in support of the criminal district attorney's office having possession, custody, or control of inmate telephone call recordings.
Opinion File
  • kp0041.pdf