United States v. Agurs
United States Supreme Court
427 U.S. 97 (1976)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
When Linda Agurs (defendant) and James Sewell checked into a motel, Sewell had a bowie knife. A short time later, motel employees heard Agurs screaming for help. They discovered Sewell on top of Agurs, struggling for the knife, which Agurs was holding. Agurs, who had no injuries, departed before authorities arrived. Sewell, who had several stab wounds, died before getting to a hospital. Agurs was indicted for second-degree murder. Circumstantial evidence showed that Sewell briefly left the room and possibly returned to find Agurs stealing his money, prompting the fight. At trial, Agurs offered no evidence. However, her counsel argued that Agurs acted in self-defense, pointing to her call for help and Sewell bringing a knife to the motel. The jury convicted Agurs. Agurs’s counsel moved for a new trial because the prosecutor failed to disclose Sewell’s prior criminal record, which contained a guilty plea for assault and two guilty pleas for carrying a deadly weapon, both knives. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that the prosecutor should have disclosed the record but that the evidence was not material and therefore did not warrant a new trial. The court of appeals reversed, deeming a new trial necessary. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
Dissent (Marshall, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
