Pieces of evidence that are the subject of an alleged Brady violation should be analyzed collectively to determine their prejudicial effect, not only individually. Thus, the Washington Supreme Court acted in a manner contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent in failing to consider the cumulative effect of the undisclosed evidence. On de novo review, however, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the witness who would have been impeached by the suppressed evidence was so severely discredited and not so critical to the prosecution’s case that there was no reasonable probability that the evidence would have affected the outcome of the case.