Citation network
Arizona Vs. Youngblood
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 29, 1988
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 51 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Arizona v. YoungbloodSearch
-
U.S. 51 (1988) Arizona v. YoungbloodSearch
-
Ariz. at 54, 734 P.2d at 596, quoting State v. EscalanteSearch
-
U. S. 858 , 458 U. S. 867 (1982). In Brady v. MarylandSearch
-
Id. at 373 U. S. 87 . In United States v. AgursSearch
-
Moore v. IllinoisSearch
-
imposed by cases such as Brady and Agurs. Our most recent decision in this area of the law, California v. TrombettaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
id. at 467 U. S. 488 , quoting Killian v. UnitedSearch
-
part of the Government when the claim is based on loss of evidence attributable to the Government. In United States v. MarionSearch
-
United States v. LovascoSearch
-
U. S. 783 , 431 U. S. 790 (1977). Similarly, in United States v. Valenzuela-BernalSearch
-
requirement of the Due Process Clause, see Lisenba v. CaliforniaSearch
-
In this case, the Arizona Court of Appeals relied on its earlier decision in State v. EscalanteSearch
-
on the police's knowledge of the exculpatory value of the evidence at the time it was lost or destroyed. Cf. Napue v. IllinoisSearch
-
California v. TrombettaSearch
-
U. S. 858 , 458 U. S. 867 (1982), is in California v. TrombettaSearch
-
one of first impression, the general standards to be applied had been developed in a number of cases, including Brady v. MarylandSearch
-
U. S. 83 (1963), and United States v. AgursSearch
-
U. S. 87 . The Brady Court went on to explain that the principle underlying earlier cases, e.g., Mooney v. HolohanSearch
-
at 373 U. S. 88 (quoting lower court opinion). In Trombetta, the Court also relied on United States v. AgursSearch
-
Id. at 467 U. S. 488 . That phrase has its source in Killian v. UnitedSearch
-
was clearly important. A semen sample in a rape case where identity is questioned is always significant. See Hilliard v. SpaldingSearch
-
People v. NationSearch
-
Hilliard v. SpaldingSearch
-
Current genetic testing measures, frequently used in civil paternity suits, are extraordinarily precise. See Clark v. JeterSearch
-
must also be without equivalent in the particular case. It must not be cumulative or collateral, cf. United States v. AgursSearch
-
In Napue v. IllinoisSearch
-
Id. at 360 U. S. 270 , quoting People v. SavvidesSearch
-
N.Y.2d 554, 557, 136 N.E.2d 853, 854-855 (1956). In Giglio v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 154 . The good faith of the prosecutor thus was irrelevant for purposes of due process. And in Roviaro v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 427 U. S. 111 , quoting Berger v. UnitedSearch
-
Nor does United States v. Valenzuela-BernalSearch
-
upon by the majority for the proposition that bad faith is necessary to show a due process violation, United States v. MarionSearch
-
U. S. 307 (1971), and United States v. LovascoSearch
-
We noted in California v. TrombettaSearch
-
United States v. WadeSearch
-
Rahaim and Brodsky, Empirical Evidence v. CommonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Arizona v. YoungbloodSearch
-
State v. EscalanteSearch
-
In Brady v. MarylandSearch
-
In United States v. AgursSearch
-
Moore v. IllinoisSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial