Repository Collection 03
Strickler v. Greene
527 U.S. 263 (1999)
CASE ENTRY
Last Revised • July 4, 2026
Strickler v. Greene clarified the elements of a constitutional violation under Brady v. Maryland. The United States Supreme Court explained that a defendant must demonstrate that favorable evidence was suppressed by the State and that the suppressed evidence was material, meaning there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the proceeding would have been different had the evidence been disclosed.
“Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 289 (1999), reviewing the merits of the defendant's Brady claim
where the prosecution's representation that the State had disclosed such evidence, and the State
contended in prior proceedings that the defendant had already received everything known to the
prosecution]”
Related SMAR Citation
Case Name
Strickler v. Greene
Citation
527 U.S. 263 (1999)
Date
June 17, 1999
Verification Source
Official United States Supreme Court opinion located through Justia.
Source Location
United States Supreme Court Opinion
Highlighted Pages
264
Referenced in the Supplemental Motion
Page 6, Paragraph 6
✔ Original United States Supreme Court opinion obtained and reviewed
✔ Relevant holding highlighted
✔ Publicly available source
✔ Included within the Source Verification Archive
May's allegation that prosecutors and law enforcement agencies failed to disclose favorable and
material evidence while maintaining that all required disclosures had been provided to the
defense. May cites Strickler v. Greene to support review of Brady claims where the State
represented that exculpatory and impeachment evidence had been disclosed, but later-discovered
information revealed that favorable evidence had in fact been withheld. May relies upon this
authority to support his claim that significant evidence concerning witness credibility, law-enforcement
misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct, and the investigation of the offenses was not
disclosed during his trial and prior post-conviction proceedings despite representations that
disclosure obligations had been satisfied.
Link to the original article.
Working research copy containing the highlighted passages cited in the Supplemental Motion.
Continue browsing the sources cited in the Introduction to the Supplemental Motion.
Return to the main Source Verification Archive and explore additional sections of the Supplemental Motion.
Source Status
Cited to Support
Supporting Documents
Original Article
Highlighted Research Copy
Continue Your Research
Return to Introduction
Return to Source Verification Archive