Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Decisions re Brady and Giglio Claims & Confrontation Rights Issues

By FindLaw Staff on April 01, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In US v. Jumah, No. 08-1931, the Seventh Circuit faced a challenge to a conviction of a DEA's confidential informant for knowing possession of a listed chemical, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe, that the chemical would be used to manufacture a controlled substance and a sentence of a 151-months' imprisonment.

In affirming the conviction, the court rejected defendant's claims of Brady and Giglio violations as his unsupported assertions that the government suppressed evidence are insufficient to make out a Brady or Giglio violation.  However, the matter is reversed and remanded for resentencing to recalculate the guidelines based on the weight of the pure drugs within the pseudoephedrine tablets and for determination of an appropriate sentence.

Ray v. Boatwright, No. 08-2825, concerned a district court's denial of defendant's petition for a habeas relief in a conviction for retaliatory shooting of an eleven-year girl.  In reversing the denial, the court held that it was an error for the trial court to admit co-actors' statements through a police detective's testimony at trial as it violated defendant's right of confrontation.

Related Resource:



You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard