whether-a-defendant-advancing-a-brady-claim-must-demonstrate-due-diligence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner James Milton Dailey uncovered exculpatory evidence that the State failed to disclose prior to trial, in violation of the rule stated in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972). This evidence included a statement by a former prosecutor indicating that Dailey’s codefendant had confessed to committing the crime. It also included a statement by a former inmate at the jail where Dailey had been housed revealing that the lead police investigator offered favorable treatment to inmates in return for testimony against Dailey; the State’s case at trial hinged almost entirely on the testimony of these jailhouse informants. But the court below refused to consider this evidence, holding that the Brady materials should have been discovered by the defense through the exercise of due diligence and that those materials, in any event, should be analyzed in isolation and not cumulatively. The questions presented are: Whether a defendant advancing a Brady claim must demonstrate that he or she could not have uncovered the suppressed evidence through the exercise of due diligence. Whether the materiality of a Brady claim must be determined by considering the probative force of the withheld evidence cumulatively and in the context of the government’s entire case. Whether the Florida Supreme Court’s error in treating petitioner’s Giglio claim as though it alleged knowing use of perjury, when it actually alleged withholding exculpatory evidence, warrants reversal. ii NOTICE OF RELATED CASES Pursuant to this Court’s Rule 14.1(b)(iii), these are related cases: Underlying Trial: Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida State of Florida v. James Milton Dailey, 1985-CF007084 Judgment Entered: August 7, 1987 Direct Appeal: Florida Supreme Court Dailey v. State, 594 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 1991) (reversed death sentence) Judgment Entered: November 14, 1991 Resentencing Proceeding: Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida State of Florida v. James Milton Dailey, 1985-CF007084 Judgment Entered: January 21, 1994 Second Direct Appeal: Florida Supreme Court Dailey v. State, 659 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1995) Judgment Entered: May 25, 1995 Supreme Court of the United States Dailey v. Florida, 516 U.S. 1095 (1996) Judgment Entered: January 22, 1996 111 First Postconviction Proceeding: Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida State of Florida v. James Milton Dailey, 1985-CF007084 Judgment Entered: July 14, 2005 Florida Supreme Court Dailey v. State, 965 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2007) Judgment Entered: May 31, 2007 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Dailey v. Florida Department of Corrections, No. 8:07-cv-01897 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2011), as amended Mar. 29, 2012 Judgment Entered: April 1, 2011 United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Dailey v. Florida Department of Corrections, No. 1212-P (11th Cir. July 19, 2012) Judgment Entered: July 19, 2012 Supreme Court of the United States Dailey v. Crews, 569 U.S. 961 (2018) Judgment Entered: April 29, 2013 Second Postconviction Proceeding: Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida State of Florida v. James Milton Dailey, 1985-CF007084 Judgment Entered: April 12, 2017 iv Florida Supreme Court Dailey v. State, 247 So. 3d 390 (Fla. 2018) Judgment Entered: June 26, 2018 Supreme Court of the United States Dailey v. Florida, 139 8. Ct. 947 (2019) Judgment Entered: January 22, 2019 Third Postconviction Proceeding: Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida State of Florida v. James Milton Dailey, 1985-CF007084 Judgment Entered: March 20, 2018 Florida Supreme Court Dailey v. State, 279 So. 3d 1208 (Fla. 2019), rhrg denied, SC18-557, 2019 WL 5152446 (Fla. Oct. 14, 2019) Judgment Entered: October 3, 2019 Supreme Court of the United States No. 19-7309, petition for certiorari filed Jan. 10, 2020 Judgment entered: pending First Successive Motion After Death Warrant Signed: Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida State of Florida v. J