Also known as: exculpatory evidences · exculpatory proof
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Evidence favorable to a criminal defendant that tends to negate guilt or reduce the degree of punishment. The prosecution must disclose such evidence when it is material to guilt or punishment because suppression violates due process even if the nondisclosure is inadvertent.
Elijah Edwards, detained as an enemy combatant, seeks habeas review after a military commission. He discovers server logs created after the proceedings that show a third party caused the alleged attack. The reviewing court must permit introduction of the logs because they directly contest the factual basis for indefinite detention.
Enzo Eastwood is charged with sabotaging a data center. Before he pleads guilty the prosecutor receives server logs and a vendor email showing a hardware defect could have caused the outage. The prosecutor does not disclose the materials. On appeal the court reverses because the evidence is favorable to guilt and material to the plea decision.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Eileen Epstein is on trial for arson. A reliable out-of-court statement from a witness who saw another person start the fire is excluded under the hearsay rule. The court must admit the statement because it is trustworthy exculpatory evidence whose exclusion would deprive Epstein of a fair trial.
Esther Eisenberg is prosecuted for murder. She offers testimony that voluntary intoxication prevented formation of the required mental state. The trial court excludes the evidence under state law. The exclusion is upheld because the evidence does not meet the constitutional threshold for admission as exculpatory proof.
Edith Eberhardt is charged with possessing a firearm after a prior conviction. The prosecution relies on a statutory presumption that possession proves interstate shipment. Eberhardt offers testimony that the gun was purchased locally. The court must allow the rebuttal evidence because it directly negates the presumed element.
Elise Everly faces preliminary hearing on felony charges. The court closes the proceeding to the public. A news organization objects because the hearing is the only forum in which Everly can present exculpatory evidence and challenge the prosecution case. The closure order is reversed to protect the right of public observation.
No. The constitutional obligation arises even without a request because due process requires disclosure of favorable material evidence regardless of whether the defense asks for it.
Evidence is material when there is a reasonable probability that its disclosure would have produced a different result at trial or in plea negotiations.
No. There is no general constitutional duty to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury, and a federal court may not dismiss an indictment solely for that reason.
No. The obligation applies to trial proceedings. A convicted defendant has no freestanding federal due process right to post-conviction disclosure of exculpatory evidence such as DNA testing.
…to introduce crucial, relevant evidence: " In the absence of any valid state justification, exclusion of this kind of exculpatory evidence deprives a defendant of the basic right to have the prosecutor's case encounter and survive the crucible of meaningful adversarial testing." 476 U. S., at 690-691 (emphasis added) (internal…