No. 18-410
Corey D. Yates v. United States
Tags: brady-doctrine brady-v-maryland brady-violation criminal-procedure disclosure due-process evidence-suppression federal-state-courts-split materiality preserving-brady-doctrine prosecutorial-disclosure prosecutorial-misconduct reasonable-diligence suppressed-evidence
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Related Cases:
18-6336
(Vide)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a defendant must show he did not know of and could not have reasonably obtained the suppressed evidence to establish a Brady violation
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether, to establish a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 88 (1963), a defendant must show that he did not know of the evidence suppressed by the government and could not have obtained it with reasonable diligence. @
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-16
Reply of petitioner Corey Yates filed. (Distributed)
2018-12-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 2, 2019.
2018-11-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 3, 2018 to January 2, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-10-25
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 3, 2018.
2018-10-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 1, 2018 to December 3, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-10-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 1, 2018)
2018-08-06
Application (18A138) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until October 1, 2018.
2018-08-03
Application (18A138) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 16, 2018 to October 1, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Attorneys
Corey Yates
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent