State v. Johnson
State v. Johnson, 464 So. 2d 1363 (La. 1985).
Cited by
- State Of Louisiana v. Jaylon K. Brown La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2023
- State v. Smith 600 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
- State v. Lambert 506 So. 2d 1384 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
- State v. Domingue 507 So. 2d 296 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
- State v. Robinson 490 So. 2d 501 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
- State v. Johnson 486 So. 2d 787 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Johnson 463 So. 2d 620
- State v. Perkins 423 So. 2d 1103
- State v. Willie 410 So. 2d 1019
Opinion text
464 So.2d 1363 (1985) STATE of Louisiana v. Walter E. JOHNSON, Jr. No. 85-K-0161. Supreme Court of Louisiana. March 15, 1985. GRANTED. This case, 463 So.2d 620 , is remanded to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration of the Brady issue under the proper standard of review. In a case where the defense had made a request for specific exculpatory evidence, the standard of materiality is whether the undisclosed evidence might have affected the jury's verdict. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963); see, State v. Perkins, 423 So.2d 1103 (La.1982); State v. Willie, 410 So.2d 1019 (La.1982). In a case where the defense had made only a general request for "all Brady material," or no request at all, the test is whether the undisclosed evidence creates a reasonable doubt that otherwise does not exist. United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976). In either case, however, the question of materiality does not turn on the standard governing new trial motions based on newly discovered evidence: that the undisclosed evidence is so material that "it would probably have changed the verdict or judgment of guilty...." La.C.Cr.P. art. 851(3). In United States v. Agurs, supra , the Supreme Court cautioned that "[i]f the standard applied to the usual motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence were the same when the evidence was in the state's possession as when it was found in a neutral source, there would be no special significance to the prosecutor's obligation to serve the cause of justice." Id., 427 U.S. at 111 , 96 S.Ct. at 2401 .