Young v. State
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of felony murder and other offenses in connection with the death of the victim. On appeal, defended asserted, inter alia, that the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland. The court held that because a report detailing the findings of a private consulting company hired by the mayor to investigate the operations of the police department was hearsay and inadmissible, defendant had not shown how its disclosure would have led to admissible evidence. Therefore, the report did not constitute Brady material. The court also held that defendant's assertion that Brady was violated because the State refused to identify a witness was without merit where defendant was aware pretrial that the State had taken statements from the witness. The court further held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of a 2004 convenience store homicide as a similar transaction. The court finally rejected defendant's contention that the trial court should have permitted him to cross-examine an officer about any possible bias and rejected defendant's contention that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a jury view. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.