No. 24-5662

In Re Noel Brown

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2024-09-30
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: brady-violation cause-and-prejudice constitutional-violation due-process exculpatory-evidence habeas-corpus
Key Terms:
Securities
Latest Conference: 2024-12-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the intentional withholding of exculpatory evidence by prosecution and failure to allow cross-examination of an arresting officer constitutes a Brady violation and fundamental miscarriage of justice

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the discovery of evidence ‘withheld at trial “intentionally, by the prosecution, not allowing arresting officer to testify ‘in a trial proceeding, or allowing the defense to ; cross examine, presents a violation under the Brady standards? 2. Is it a fundamental miscarriage of justice for a District Court to not directly transfer a petition for habeas corpus, to the Court of Appeal upon showing of "cause & prejudice" exculpatory evidence? ; a 3. Is knowledge of innocence by a investigating officer during an investigation that would have prevented any juror from convicting “the wholly innocent petitioner. Intentionally withheld by arresting officer not testifylig at trial, a Constitutional violation under "Brady? oe . -4, Should the Court deny a motion to appoint counsel, when a petitioner identify objective factors external to the defense at trial that impeded their efforts to comply with the | State's procedural rule. When actual -innocence by new reliable evidence that was not , A presented at trial, due to the failure of the arresting officer to attend, and testify under oath at trial. A fundamental Miscarriage of Justice? 5. Does the United States Supreme Court, has jurisdiction to compel the District Court, to transfer the. petition for habeas corpus, to the Court of Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§1631. Because the district court lacks jurisdiction to consider the petition. Or to appoint counsel to aid petitioner because applicant shows factual prejudice, & the claim could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence? 6. Isa Brady} claim a showing that those violations are so great as to be of a costitutional dimension. If |the petitioner makes the standard showing of cause and prejudice, or establishes a fundamental hiscarriage of justice? Oo \ . eps .

Docket Entries

2024-12-09
Petition DENIED.
2024-11-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2024.
2024-09-03
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 30, 2024)

Attorneys

In Re Noel Brown
Noel Brown — Petitioner
Noel Brown — Petitioner