In circumstances where the favorable evidence lies in the hands of a governmental entity other than law enforcement or the prosecution, what is the proper inquiry to determine whether that entity is acting on behalf of the prosecution, such that the prosecution is obligated to discover and disclose Brady material held by that entity?

QUESTION PRESENTED 1) In Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 487 (1995), this Court held that “the individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police.” Lower courts have struggled to define the scope of this obligation when individuals and entities other than investigating law enforcement officers are involved with the prosecution. Some courts—such as the Sixth Circuit here—hold it is determinative that the evidence is not in the hands of the prosecution or investigating law enforcement officers. Other circuits—including the Third, Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth— hold that courts must examine the functional relationship between the prosecution and the entity to determine whether such an obligation exists. The question presented is: In circumstances where the favorable evidence lies in the hands of a governmental entity other than law enforcement or the prosecution, what is the proper inquiry to determine whether that entity is acting on behalf of the prosecution, such that the prosecution is obligated to discover and disclose Brady material held by that entity? i LIST OF