Is state-attorney-undisclosed-substantial-assistance-motion-newly-discovered-evidence-resulting-in-brady-violation

QUESTION PRESENTED During the course of Mr. Washington Trial, State’s Attorney Stated several different times to the trial judge, jurors, and defense that it’s main witness (Isaiah Fields) was not obtaining any “benefit” for his Trial Testimony, Evenfurther the State Attorney main witness Mr. Fields testified he was not gaining any benefit for . his trial testimony. “However this was not the case” (2) months after Mr. Washington was convicted. The State’s Attorney filed a substantial assistance motion with an entirely different Judge then the one presided over the trial for it’s main witness (Isaiah Fields) Trial Testimony in helping convict Mr. Washington. Trial Court granted the substantial assistance motion and the State Attorney main witness (Isaiah Fields) “Prison” “Sentence” was “Reduced”. Trial Court or the State Attorney never disclosed any of this evidence to Mr. Mr. Washington uncovered this favorable suppress evidence and raised it threw Counsel on 2" Postconviction as newly discovered evidence showing the State Attorney in it’s main witness Isaiah Fields had an undisclosed plea tacit. agreement that resulted in a Brady violation. The 3" Circuit Court relied upon the trial court judgement in procedurally bar this Brady violation claim from review i stating the evidence is not newly discovered it was available for defense attorney’s to raise on direct appeal and/or 1*' Postconviction have trial counsel check the State witness Mr. Fields criminal docket. The case thus presents the following questions: 1. Is State Attorney undisclosed substantial assistance motion “Newly Discover Evidence” resulting in a Brady violation? And violation of Petitioner 5° and 14" Amendment rights. 2. Did State Attorney in it’s main witness commit perjury or Fraud on the Court? By having a undisclosed Plea Tacit Agreement that resulted in a violation of Brady? 3. Did Trial and 3% Circuit Court of Appeals erred by procedurally bar this Brady violation claim for review? 4. Was Trial Counsel and 1" Postconviction Counsel Ineffective Assistance of Counsel for “Withdrawing” from representing Mr. Washington? In raising this favorable suppress evidence on Mr. Washington direct appeal in 1* Postconviction? Furthermore was Court appointed Trial Counsel in 1* Postconviction Counsel ineffective assistance of counsel for neglecting to check | State Witnesses “Criminal Docket”? in raise a claim showing a Brady? Thus showing constitutional violation of Mr. Washington 6" Amendment right. And do to direct ii appeal and 1* Postconviction Counsel withdrawing motions do Mr. Washington _ over-come the procedural default. ii