Brady Rights in a System of Pleas: Analyzing the Ninth Circuit’s “Apparent Position”

Brady v. Maryland protects the due process rights of criminal defendants by requiring that prosecutors disclose material exculpatory evidence and impeachment evidence to the defense. United States v. Ruiz subsequently limited the scope of the Brady rule by holding that in the context of plea bargaining, Brady does not require prosecutors to disclose material impeachment evidence prior to entering a plea agreement. This led to a federal circuit split regarding whether Brady duties apply to material exculpatory evidence during plea bargaining or whether Brady is strictly a trial right. This Note first introduces Brady and its progeny and summarizes the current circuit split. Then, by analyzing case law, this Note argues that while the Ninth Circuit has never taken a direct stance in the circuit split, its position is that the government must disclose material exculpatory evidence prior to a defendant’s entry of a guilty plea. Lastly, this Note examines ethical requirements and the Department of Justice’s policy that already mandate prosecutors to do so in the Ninth Circuit. However, this Note argues that only a constitutional requirement to disclose exculpatory evidence will protect the rights of criminal defendants.