Moore v. Illinois

Decision Date28 June 1971
Docket NumberNo. 5056,5056
Citation29 L.Ed.2d 864,91 S.Ct. 2280,403 U.S. 953
PartiesLyman A. MOORE, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Motion of American Civil Liberties Union, Illinois Division, and Illinois Committee for the Abolition of Capital Punishment for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, granted. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Illinois granted limited to Questions 1, 3 and 4 set forth in the petition which read as follows:

'1. Petitioner was sentenced to death for murder. Six items of exonerating evidence were not disclosed to him at trial. The court below affirmed on the ground that the prosecution's duty to disclose exonerating evidence depends upon a request; that the prosecutor had shown his entire file to defense counsel at trial and no further request for disclosure was made. None of the exonerating items was contained in said file. Trial defense counsel were ignorant of the existence of the suppressed information.

'Questions presented are:

'(a) Whether a request is an indispensable prerequisite to disclosure of exonerating evidence by the State?

'(b) Whether material evidence favorable to an accused should be disclosed by the State without a request where such evidence is not recorded?

'(c) Whether denial of due process of law is contingent upon a request where a State knowingly permits false testimony to remain uncorrected?

'(d) Where a prosecutor shows his entire file to defense counsel at trial, but none of the exonerating items of evidence are contained in said file, does that satisfy the prosecution's duty of disclosure?

'(e) Whether nondisclosure of the prosecuting police department is imputable to the prosecution?

'3. The deceased was killed with a twelve-gauge, shotgun. The Chicago Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory determined that he was killed with a twelve-gauge shotgun. (A.139.) The prosecutor stated in a Bill of Particulars that the murder weapon was a twelve-gauge shotgun. (A.2.)

Over objection (A.81-94), the prosecution introduced a sixteen-gauge shotgun into evidence. (A.94.) The sixteen-gauge shotgun did not belong to the petitioner, was not recovered from him, and was never in his possession or control. (A.58, 66-71.)

During closing argument the prosecutor told the jury that the sixteen-gauge shotgun was not the weapon that killed the deceased, but that any man who was with another man who had the shotgun and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • State v. Patterson
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • April 2, 1996
    ...aid to counsel, not right of accused); Segura v. Patterson, 402 F.2d 249, 252 (10th Cir.1968), rev'd on other grounds, 403 U.S. 946, 91 S.Ct. 2280, 29 L.Ed.2d 856 (1971) (right to PSI has not risen to dignity of constitutional requirement); Elswick v. Holland, 623 F.Supp. 498, 502 (S.D.W.Va......
  • State v. Young
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • March 17, 1993
    ...97 S.Ct. 136, 50 L.Ed.2d 122 (1976); Segura v. Patterson, 402 F.2d 249, 252 (10th Cir.1968), rev'd on other grounds, 403 U.S. 946, 91 S.Ct. 2280, 29 L.Ed.2d 856 (1971).137 See infra note 177 and accompanying text.138 Article I, section 10 of the Rhode Island Constitution grants accused pers......
  • Alderman v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • July 6, 1978
    ...strikes available to the state. This same issue attracted the United States Supreme Court's attention in Moore v. Illinois, 403 U.S. 953, 91 S.Ct. 2280, 29 L.Ed.2d 864 (1971). In that case, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari on the issue, inter alia, of whether a deat......
  • McCorquodale v. Balkcom
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • December 30, 1983
    ... ... Illinois, 391 U.S. 510, 88 S.Ct. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776 (1968), had been violated. McCorquodale v. Balkcom, 705 F.2d 1553 (11th Cir.1983). This court elected ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • New Life for Connecticut's Death Penalty: Revised(fn*)
    • United States
    • Connecticut Bar Association Connecticut Bar Journal No. 74, 1999
    • Invalid date
    ...has granted certiorari in the cases of Aikens v. CaliVornia, Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas, 403 U.S. 952, 91 S. Ct. 2280, 2282, 2287, 29 L. Ed. 2d 863, 864, limited in each case to the following question: "Does the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT