Experimental. Doctrines is a new Annlex feature, starting with four areas: Self-incrimination, Brady, Terry and Miranda. Each page collects what courts have said about a leading case, quoted from the opinions that cite it. Annlex Chat uses these collections to help find relevant cases; what a case holds still comes from its opinion. We'd like to hear what's useful, missing or wrong: Send feedback

Please join our beta test

Prosecutor's duty to learn of favorable evidence

Doctrine › Brady

Leading case

Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995)

How courts have described it

holding that "prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf in the case " (emphasis added)

United States v. Edison Misla-Aldarondo, 478 F.3d 52 (1st Cir. 2007)

holding, in the Brady context, that an "individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others...."

Robert E. Kennedy v. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, State of California, 379 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2004)

holding that “the individual prosecutor- has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government’s behalf in the case”

United States v. Bagcho, 151 F. Supp. 3d 60 (D.D.C. 2015)

holding that the “individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police”

Higgs v. United States, 711 F. Supp. 2d 479 (D. Md. 2010)

recognizing that the "prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf in the case, including the police"

State v. Sandy & Supris, 788 S.E.2d 200 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016)

concluding that “the individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police”

Queen v. State, 198 P.3d 731 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008)

Related doctrines

About this page

The quotations above are from court opinions that cite the leading case, in each court's own words. The heading is a short label Annlex generated from those quotations. It has not been reviewed by a lawyer and is not legal advice.