U.S. v. DELAY, CR15-175 RSL. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20170412i89
Visitors: 10
Filed: Apr. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DISCLOSURE OF MARYSA COMER'S VIOLATION REPORTS ROBERT S. LASNIK , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on defendant's "Motion Directing U.S. Probation to Disclose Marysa Comer's Violation Reports," Dkt. # 266, and the Court's subsequent "Order Directing U.S. Probation to Disclose Marysa Comer's Violation Reports," Dkt. # 300. Pursuant to the Court's order, the United States Probation Office provided the Court with copies of all bond violation reports regarding
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DISCLOSURE OF MARYSA COMER'S VIOLATION REPORTS ROBERT S. LASNIK , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on defendant's "Motion Directing U.S. Probation to Disclose Marysa Comer's Violation Reports," Dkt. # 266, and the Court's subsequent "Order Directing U.S. Probation to Disclose Marysa Comer's Violation Reports," Dkt. # 300. Pursuant to the Court's order, the United States Probation Office provided the Court with copies of all bond violation reports regarding M..
More
ORDER GRANTING DISCLOSURE OF MARYSA COMER'S VIOLATION REPORTS
ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on defendant's "Motion Directing U.S. Probation to Disclose Marysa Comer's Violation Reports," Dkt. # 266, and the Court's subsequent "Order Directing U.S. Probation to Disclose Marysa Comer's Violation Reports," Dkt. # 300. Pursuant to the Court's order, the United States Probation Office provided the Court with copies of all bond violation reports regarding Ms. Comer and pertaining to the above-referenced cause number for the Court's in camera review. Having reviewed the reports for probative, relevant, and material information bearing on Ms. Comer's credibility, see United States v. Alvarez, 358 F.3d 1194, 1209 (9th Cir. 2004), the Court concludes that all reports should be disclosed to the defense (though not to defendant himself). Without commenting on whether the reports contain impeachment evidence, under the totality of the circumstances the Court finds that the requirements of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972) are best served by disclosure of the reports in full.
The Court will contact the parties to arrange for transmission of the reports.
Source: Leagle
