Delma Banks, JR. v. Doug Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (540 U.S. 668)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 24, 2004 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 540 U.S. 668 · 124 S. Ct. 1256
- Decided
- February 24, 2004
- Term
- October Term 2003
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority author
- Justice Ginsburg
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court. Petitioner Delma Banks, Jr., was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. Prior to trial, the State advised Banks’s attorney there would be no need to litigate discovery issues, representing: “[W]e will, without the necessity of motions[,] provide you with all discovery to which you are entitled.” App. 361, n. 1; App. to Pet. for Cert. A4 (both sources’ internal quotation marks omitted). Despite that undertaking, the State withheld evidence that would have allowed Banks to discredit two essential prosecution witnesses. The State did not disclose that one of those witnesses was a paid police informant, nor did it disclose a pretrial transcript revealing that the other witness’ trial testimony had been intensively coached by prosecutors and law enforcement officers. Furthermore, the prosecution raised no red flag when the informant testified, untruthfully, that he never gave the police any statement and, indeed, had not talked to any police officer about the case until a few days before the trial. Instead of correcting the informant’s false statements, the prosecutor told the jury that the witness “ha[d] been open and honest with you in every way,” App. 140, and that his testimony was of the “utmost significance,” id., at 146. Similarly, the prosecution allowed the other key witness to convey, untruthfully, that…
Excerpt of a 64,550-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.