or
Remember me
Back
On February 17, 2021, the Third Circuit affirmed Rad's conviction of securities fraud, rejecting his claims that the prosecution had withheld evidence regarding one of its key witnesses at his trial. The Court’s non-precedential decision affirms the District Court of New Jersey’s denial of Rad’s motion to vacate his conviction and sentence under 28 U.S.C. §2255. Although the Court initially granted Rad’s application for a certificate of appealability, it ultimately found that even if the government had failed to disclose prior statements by one of its key witnesses, the evidence was not material. In reaching its decision the Court applied the 3rd Circuit standard that a Brady violation occurs when a prosecutor suppresses evidence that is both favorable to the accused and material to the outcome of the trial, citing Dennis v. Sec’y Pa. Dep’t of Corr., 834 F.3d 263, 284-85 (3rd Cir. 2016) (en banc). Here it found that Rad’s claim failed to meet the standard for materiality, which requires a reasonable probability that the disclosure of the disputed evidence would have produced a different result. As a result, it refused to vacate Rad’s conviction and 71 month prison sentence
A daily snapshot of everything from market open to close.