Sims v. Hyatte

Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s habeas petition that challenged his attempted murder conviction on grounds that prosecutor committed Brady violation by failing to disclose that victim, as sole witness to identify defendant as culprit, was hypnotized prior to trial to enhance his recollection of shooting. While Indiana courts found that any error was harmless, where victim had identified defendant as culprit three times prior to undergoing hypnosis, and hence suppression of said fact was not “material” under Brady, Ct. of Appeals found that instant impeachment evidence was material, and thus should have been disclosed, where: (1) prosecution had no case without identification made by victim; and (2) fact that victim had been hypnotized would have undermined his credibility and gave jury false impression that victim was confident in his identification. Ct. further noted that failure to disclose hypnotism of victim was prejudicial, since said evidence would have caused jury to easily question witness’ overall credibility as eyewitness. (Dissent filed.)