The Attorney General has filed brief to the Florida Supreme Court in Lunch v. State, the District Court decision that holds law enforcement does no have to submit all the results of a facial recognition software program search to the attorneys for a criminal defendant so identified by it, under the Brady decision. The thrust of the brief is that the high court has no basis to invoke its discretionary jurisdiction to hear the case, and that therefore the Lynch case should remain the law in Florida on the subject. Brady requires that evidence that would tend to prove innocence must be disclosed to the defense.
The issues presented;
(1) There is no Conflict Certiorari, which would give the Supreme Court the ability to hear the case, as the two cases cited by the Petitioner are not on point with the Lynch facts, on the same question of law.
(2) To prevail under Brady, Petitioner must show that the results of the trial would have been different if the suppressed document were admitted into evidence. Non-matching photographs produced in a facial recognition program search would not have resulted in a verdict of innocence, as they would not have cleared the defendant.
(3) The lower court did not expressly construe any Constitutional provisions in its opinion.
(4) The lower court did not ask the Supreme court to Certify a point, based upon a question of great public importance.
If the Court declineS to hear the case, then Lynch v. State shall remain the rule in the State of Florida, and law enforcement agencies and prosecutors will not be required to disclose all results obtained through a facial recognition system search being used to identify a criminal defendant.
Readers who wish to review the brief may access it here.