Whether the prosecution's pretrial evidentiary suppression of various law enforcement reports, interviews and statements favorable to the Petitioner violated due process, under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good or bad faith of the prosecution and thereby undermined confidence in the outcome of Petitioner's trial

QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioner Nathaniel Hoskins was indicted for his participation in a RICO Conspiracy; Conspiracy to Murder in Aid of Racketeering Activity; and Possession of a Firearm in Relation to a Crime of Violence. After a bench trial Petitioner was convicted on all counts. After the trial the Government tendered 500 pages of various law enforcement reports, interviews and statements from the “king” or leader of the Double Insane Vice Lords street gang (“IIVLs”) who had been acting as a confidential informant while he was leading the IIVLs and which were gathered over a period of 6 years prior to Petitioner’s indictment. (“D.J. material”) In the district court Petitioner challenged the unconstitutional suppression of the D.J. material under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny. The district denied Petitioner’s post trial motions raised under Brady and thereafter the district court imposed concurrent sentences of 120 months on the RICO and Firearm counts and life imprisonment on the Conspiracy to Murder count. Petitioner appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals where the judgments of the district court were affirmed. The question presented is this: Whether the prosecution’s pretrial evidentiary suppression of various law enforcement reports, interviews and statements favorable to the Petitioner violated due process, under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good or bad faith of the prosecution and thereby undermined confidence in the outcome of Petitioner’s trial. ii