State Of Louisiana v. Michael Russell

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2020 KW 0497

VERSUS

MICHAEL RUSSELL SEPTEMBER 03, 2020

In Re: State of Louisiana, for
applying supervisory writs,

21st Judicial District Court, Parish ofTangipahoa,
No. 1802741.

BEFORE: McDONALD, THERIOT, AND CHUTZ, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The state is under no duty to investigate in
order to obtain exculpatory information. Rather, the state has
a duty to provide a defendant with favorable information, which
is within its possession, control or knowledge.
custody, See
La. Code Crim. P. arts 718 & 719. See State
also v. Edwards,
420 So. 2d 663 ( La. 1982). In the instant case, the district
court the to
erroneously ordered state conduct a forensic
examination on a cellphone in its possession to determine the
contents of the phone and discover whether or not it contains
evidence favorable to the defendant. Thus, the district court' s
ruling ordering the state to conduct a forensic investigation of
the phone is reversed. If the state
subsequently decides to
conduct a forensic investigation of the phone at issue, then
pursuant
to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83, 87, 83 S. Ct. 1194,
1196- 97, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 ( 1963), the state would be expected to
provide the defense with any favorable evidence discovered.
Further, the defense may conduct its own forensic investigation
of the cellphone. See La. Code Crim. P. art 719( A).

JMM
MRT

WRC

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

P' EPUTY
FOR
LEW OF
THE COURT
COURT