The full court declined to take up appeal brought by Davel Chinn, who shot and killed a man named Brian Jones as a part of an attempted robbery. Chinn was sentenced to death after another man, an accomplice named Marvin Washington, identified him for police. But after his conviction, Chinn argued that the state had violated a 1963 case called Brady v. Maryland, when it failed to disclose Washington’s juvenile records that indicated Washington had a “moderate range” of intellectual disability.
Jackson wrote her first written opinion – a dissent – saying that there was “no dispute” that the state had “suppressed exculpatory evidence” and questioned how the lower courts had applied the so called “materiality standard.” She said that to prove a violation of Brady, a defendant has a “low burden” to show the “reasonable probability” of a different outcome.
Diversity hire. Won’t age well.
Of course she did, criminal lover and not qualified for the court. She’ll be writing a lot of dissents in her life on the court, she’s so out of touch of reality and the rule of law.
I probably won't agree with Justice Jackson on much, but I agree here. Withholding evidence is a terrible act of corruption.
And yet, she still can't tell anyone what a woman is.
By the way. Ed Snowden just dropped this.
Bet we can figure this one out.
Of course she would side with the criminal.