10.07.2015 Views

Response in Opposition to the Commonwealth's Motion to Vacate

Response in Opposition to the Commonwealth's Motion to Vacate

Response in Opposition to the Commonwealth's Motion to Vacate

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

evidence suppressed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Brady prosecution was material as <strong>to</strong> capital sentenc<strong>in</strong>g, albeit not as <strong>to</strong>guilt. Id. at 90. In two more recent decisions, <strong>the</strong> United States Supreme Court has similarlyreiterated that suppressed evidence could be material as <strong>to</strong> punishment. See Banks, 540 U.S. at 699-703 (suppression of evidence concern<strong>in</strong>g important prosecution witness material as <strong>to</strong> capitalsentenc<strong>in</strong>g); Cone, 556 U.S. at 469-76 (suppression of evidence regard<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> seriousness ofdefendant's drug problem necessitated remand <strong>to</strong> determ<strong>in</strong>e materiality as <strong>to</strong> capital sentenc<strong>in</strong>g).Rely<strong>in</strong>g on this l<strong>in</strong>e of cases, Judge Sarm<strong>in</strong>a found that <strong>the</strong> suppression of evidence wasmaterial at <strong>the</strong> sentenc<strong>in</strong>g phase. NT 9/28/12 at 45-46. An exam<strong>in</strong>ation of <strong>the</strong> record makes clearthat this f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g should be affirmed by this Court.First, <strong>the</strong> Commonwealth suppressed evidence from its witness, Reverend CharlesPo<strong>in</strong>dexter. Dur<strong>in</strong>g Rev. Po<strong>in</strong>dexter's <strong>in</strong>itial <strong>in</strong>terview with police, he <strong>to</strong>ld detectives "that aboutfive years prior <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terview <strong>the</strong>re had been a compla<strong>in</strong>t from <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r ofa 17-year old boy atchurch who said that <strong>the</strong> victim propositioned him for sex." NT 9/28/12 at 24-25. However, <strong>the</strong>version of this <strong>in</strong>terview that was turned over <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> defense "omitted those portions of ReverendPo<strong>in</strong>dexter's statement entirely." Id. at 25. Additionally, Reverend Po<strong>in</strong>dexter testified at trial thatMr. Norwood was "a k<strong>in</strong>d church volunteer who wanted <strong>to</strong> help out <strong>the</strong> kids of <strong>the</strong> neighborhood."Id. at 36. Dur<strong>in</strong>g cross-exam<strong>in</strong>ation Reverend Po<strong>in</strong>dexter was asked whe<strong>the</strong>r he was aware "that Mr.Norwood had some problem <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> past." Id. at 35. The Commonwealth objected and Rev.Po<strong>in</strong>dexter was not permitted <strong>to</strong> answer <strong>the</strong> question. Id. at 35.Second, <strong>the</strong> trial prosecu<strong>to</strong>r "failed <strong>to</strong> disclose evidence <strong>in</strong> her possession that <strong>the</strong> victim hadmade sexual advances on a teenage member of his church, and that <strong>the</strong>re were o<strong>the</strong>r possible<strong>in</strong>stances of sexual impropriety." Id. at 23. Indeed, <strong>in</strong> Ms. Foulkes' own handwrit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> her24

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!