Skip to content
Name: Pham v. Terhune
Case #: 03-17214
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 03/07/2005

At Pham’s murder trial, he presented a defense that another man, Tuan, was the second shooter. While in police custody, Tuan was subjected to a gunshot residue (GSR) test, which was analyzed by a criminalist. Tuan was released and never charged in the murder. The defense called the criminalist as a witness. Prior to trial, Pham’s attorney requested the lab reports of the GSR test from the state, and the state refused to release them. In his habeas petition, Pham argued that the district court erred when it found that the government’s failure to disclose the GSR notes and lab report did not violate Brady v. Maryland. The appellate court did not reach the merits of the Brady claim, but remanded for the district court to order discovery of the lab notes so that Pham can fully develop his Brady claim.