State v. Hubbard

Amicus brief arguing that defendants have a constitutional right to access police officer internal affairs reports and that public defenders should be able to discuss information obtained from police officer internal affairs reports with their colleagues.

The issue in this appeal is whether, as a matter of constitutional right, defendants are entitled to internal affairs records of police officers whose conduct is relevant to the prosecution of the defendants and whether public defenders may share this information with their colleagues in the Office of Public Defender (OPD). Internal affairs reports typically involve allegations of dishonesty and wrongdoing by the police officers. These reports may bear on the credibility of the police as witnesses or on the legitimacy of the investigation of defendants’ alleged crimes.

In its amicus brief, the ACLU-NJ argues that the State has an obligation under Brady v. Maryland to turn over police officer internal affairs reports to defendants, and it is not enough to simply inform defendants that this material exists without providing the substantive information detailed in it. Additionally, the brief argues that once the information has been turned over, public defenders may not be prevented from discussing this information with their colleagues within the OPD. The OPD is and should be treated similarly to a law firm, and defense attorneys employed by law firms may discuss this material with their colleagues. A rule restricting only public defenders unfairly affects defendants who are being represented by public defenders and not by private defense attorneys.