440 Motion Granted Due to Brady Violation
In 2016, following a bench trial, Mr. Hay was convicted of burglary as a sexually motivated felony and related offenses. After his appeal was modified and otherwise affirmed by the Appellate Division in 2022, Appellate Advocates filed a 440 motion to vacate the conviction. One of the grounds raised in the motion was that the prosecution committed a Brady violation by failing to disclose to the defense the complainant’s phone records. These records would have impeached her trial testimony that she had no contact with Mr. Hay in the months leading up to the incident.
Following a five-day 440 hearing, the trial court granted the motion based on this Brady violation. The court recognized that the complainant was the sole witness to the events that took place and that her testimony was key to the verdict. Because the defense at trial was that the relationship between Mr. Hay and the complainant was ongoing at the time of the incident, the phone records — to the extent they contradicted the complainant’s testimony — could have been used to impeach her and the prosecution’s case. Since the phone records were material and not disclosed to the defense in a timely fashion, and there was a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different had they been shared, there was a Brady violation. The 440 motion to vacate the conviction was granted.
Chelsey Amelkin represented Mr. Hay