County, prosecutors and police not legally accountable for their failure to comply with "Brady rules."

In D'Ambrosio v. Marino, the plaintiff attempted to hold someone in government accountable for his improper criminal prosecution.  Under federal law, the government is obligated to provide to an accused any exculpatory evidence it collects during an investigation.  This is a long-standing rule arising out of the "Brady" case and is known as the "Brady Rule."  D'Ambrosio argued that the violation of the Brady Rule in his case resulted in substantial injury to him, and documented widespread violation of the rule by one of the prosecutors and the employer county.

The Court dismissed his case and the Court of Appeals affirmed.  It held that the police officers were not obligated to compy with the Brady Rule because it requires compliance by the prosecutor.  The Court also held that the County's failure to rein-in a rogue prosecutor, no matter how long it continued, did not prove a "municipal custom," which is necessary to hold the county responsible for its employee's constitutional violations.