STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION FILE NO. ????? COUNTY OF ????? STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ?????????? ) ) ) ) ) ) MOTION TO COMPEL STATE TO DISCLOSE EVIDENCE THAT WOULD ASSIST MOTIONS FILED BY DEFENDANT TO HAVE A REASONABLE BOND SET NOW COMES Defendant, by and through counsel, and respectfully moves this Court to order the State to disclose all material evidence in its possession that would assist any request made by Defendant that a reasonable bond be set in this case. This motion includes a request for all evidence that tends to exculpate Defendant on the charges for which he is currently being held, and for all evidence that tends to show that he played a lesser role in that offense. The disclosure of such information is required under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, §§ 19 and 27 of the North Carolina Constitution, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-534, and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny. Defendant currently has no bond. Defendant has been in custody since ?????????????. During that time, the State has only supplied the defense with [DEPENDS ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES] NO DISCOVERY/ VERY LIMITED DISCOVERY. North Carolina General Statute Section 15A-534(c) establishes the factors a court should consider in determining reasonable conditions of release. Those factors include the nature and circumstances of the offense charged and the weight of the evidence against the Defendant. Therefore, if the State has information that tends to show that Defendant was not involved in the crime for which he is being held, that information is relevant to a bond hearing because it goes to the weight of the evidence. [IF THERE IS A CODEFENDANT, YOU MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE THIS SENTENCE: Likewise, any evidence that the State has showing that the codefendant was the most culpable person in the case is also relevant for bond purposes because that information goes directly to the nature and circumstances of the offense. ] If the State has information that would assist Defendant in obtaining a bond, it must disclose that information in a manner that allows him to secure his bond. The State is required to disclose exculpatory information. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976); Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995). Brady and its progeny do more than require the State to disclose information that would be helpful to Defendant during the guilt-innocence phase of a trial. For example, the State is also required to disclose exculpatory information that relates solely to the issue of sentencing. See Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 294-95 (1999) (Supreme Court analyzes the effects that undisclosed evidence would have had on capital sentencing decision in assessing its materiality). Just as the state and federal constitutions forbid cruel and unusual punishment, they also prohibit excessive bails. U.S. Constitution, Amend. VI; N.C. Constitution, Article I, § 27. A defendant’s right against excessive bail being set is violated when the State withholds evidence that would entitle him to bond if it was known by the court considering his bond motion. Defendant is entitled to all information that tends to show that he was not involved in the commission of these offenses because that information goes directly to the weight of the evidence. That includes, but is not limited to, any evidence that any 2 witness recognized persons other than Defendant as being the perpetrator of these offenses; that any eyewitness failed to identify Defendant as one of the perpetrators of the offense; and that any eyewitness who did identify Defendant had difficulty or was unsure of his or her identification. Further, Defendant is entitled to any information that other persons played the major role in this case because that information goes directly to nature and circumstances of the offense. [IF YOU HAVE A CODEFENDANT, YOU MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE: That includes, but is not limited to, any evidence showing that the codefendant or any other individual was the person who actually shot the victims in this case.] Defendant is entitled to know any information that will assist him with his bond as soon as it is known by the prosecutor or any police officer. A defendant is entitled to have exculpatory information in a timely manner. State v. Canady, 355 N.C. 242, 253 (2002). Since Defendant’s incarceration will l