Case Analysis Paper Brady V. Maryland, 373 U.s. 83

Disciplinary Assignment Student NameInstructorCourseDateBrady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)This was a landmark case in the United States Supreme Court whereby the prosecution withheld from the criminal defendant certain evidence. In order for the defendant to challenge his conviction, he had to argue that it had been contrary to the Fourteenth amendment Due Process Clause to the United States Constitution. In this case, Maryland prosecuted Brady and Boblit, as a companion for murder. Despite Brady claiming that Boblit had done the actual killing, he also admitted that he was part of the murdering instance. The prosecution had withheld a written statement when Boblit confessed that he had done the killing act. The Maryland Court of Appeals remanded the case for a retrial on the punishment question only as it had affirmed the conviction. This case defines dishonest police officers as ‘Brady cops’. Due to the Brady ruling reason, there is necessity of prosecutors to make a notice to the defendants as well as their attorneys the moment a law enforcement official included in the case has a sustained record for knowingly lying in an official capacity. The evidence