Withheld evidence in criminal trials
Jesus Eric Carasco v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Jesus Eric Carasco asked the Supreme Court to review whether a federal court could reject his claim that the government withheld evidence undermining an alleged confession without considering whether that evidence, viewed with the trial record, could reasonably have changed the outcome.
- Who it affects
- Carasco did not get Supreme Court review, but the denial does not decide whether his claim was legally sound.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court refused to hear the case (denied review) and did not decide that question.
Carasco raised the claim in federal new-trial proceedings under Rule 33, saying the government withheld favorable evidence that undermined an alleged confession.
Question presented
Whether a federal court may reject a claim, presented in Rule 33 proceedings, that the Government suppressed favorable evidence undermining an alleged confession on the grounds that the evidence is "merely impeaching" and would not probably produce acquittal, without applying Brady's reasonable-probability standard to that evidence in the context of the trial record.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials from the Court and the parties. Grounded in docket records and cited sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.