No. 25-7125

Anthony William Beeson v. Christopher Pierce, Warden

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2026-04-01
Status: Pending
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: Brady-violation discovery-obligations due-process exculpatory-evidence ineffective-assistance-of-counsel prosecutorial-misconduct
Latest Conference: N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)

• If police confiscate exculpatory evidence, is the prosecution required
to disclose it under Brady? .

• If the lead investigator hides evidence in a discreet personal location,
and does not disclose it until after trial, is that a Brady violation?.

• If the court denies relief for the Brady violation by stating it was
"Ineffective Assistance", can they later claim it's not ineffective without
admitting it's Brady?.

• If trial counsel is aware of existing exculpatory evidence in the possession
of police, and fails to pursue and retrieve for defense. Is this lack of
due diligence deficient performance?. Is it ineffective assistance?.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether police confiscation of exculpatory evidence without disclosure constitutes a Brady violation, and whether trial counsel's failure to pursue such evidence constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel

Docket Entries

2026-03-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 1, 2026)

Attorneys

Anthony William Beeson
Anthony William Beeson — Petitioner