District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne
United States Supreme Court
557 U.S. 52 (2009)
William Osborne (defendant) was convicted of kidnapping and sexual assault in Alaska in 1993. The parole board released Osborne from prison after 14 years, due in part to his confession to the crime at a parole hearing. Osborne was subsequently arrested for a new crime, and the District Attorney’s Office for the Third Judicial District (plaintiff) petitioned to revoke his parole. Osborne then requested that the Alaska Court of Appeals order deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing on biological evidence found on a condom collected from the 1993 crime scene. Osborne claimed that he had made the same request of his lawyer, Sidney Billingslea, at the 1993 trial, but that she had failed to act on his request. Billingslea testified that she had not requested the testing for various reasons, including her belief that the results would confirm Osborne’s guilt. Osborne alleged that his confession had been a lie made in order to gain a quicker release. The court of appeals denied relief based on Osborne’s failure to make the request at the 1993 trial and his confession to the parole board. Osborne then brought a federal action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that he was entitled to DNA testing under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The federal district court agreed with Osborne and ordered the state to turn over the evidence for testing. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that the duty to disclose exculpatory evidence extends to postconviction proceedings. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the constitutional claim.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)
Concurrence (Alito, J.)
Dissent (Souter, J.)
Dissent (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 709,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 709,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.