No. 92-KD-3184 | La. | Sep 23, 1994
Granted in part; denied in part. This case is remanded to the district court for purposes of conducting an evidentiary hearing on relator’s claim that the state knew or should have known that Richard “Funk” Perkins lied at trial about his knowledge of, or the benefit he hoped to derive from, the reward offered by the victim’s family and that the state did nothing to correct the witness’s testimony disavowing any motive or bias in the case. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1985-07-02" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/united-states-v-bagley-111514?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="111514">473 U.S. 667, 105 S.Ct. 3375, 87 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985); Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264, 79 S.Ct. 1173, 3 L.Ed.2d 1217 (1959). In all
Hall, J., not on panel. Rule IV, Part 2, § 3.