373 U.S. 83 (1963)
Brady v. Maryland is a seminal Supreme Court decision that fundamentally shaped the landscape of criminal procedure by mandating the disclosure of exculpatory evidence by the prosecution.
Does the prosecution's suppression of evidence favorable to an accused violate due process when the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment?
The suppression of evidence favorable to the accused by the prosecution violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment.
Yes, the suppression of evidence by the prosecution favorable to an accused violates the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial under the Due Process Clause when the evidence is material to either guilt or punishment.
For law students, Brady v. Maryland is a foundation for understanding the ethical obligations of prosecutors and the procedural safeguards necessary for equitable adjudication in criminal proceedings. It establishes the 'Brady Rule,' which influences numerous aspects of criminal litigation, from pre-trial discovery to appellate reviews. By relying on constitutional principles, Brady highlights the judiciary's role in ensuring that fundamental rights are preserved in the face of prosecutorial discretion.