By Mrs. Eileen Hunter — about the author. Posted August 11, 2026.
The definition
Exculpatory evidence is evidence favorable to an accused person — evidence that tends to show innocence, undercut the State’s case, or reduce punishment. Since Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), the Constitution has required prosecutors to disclose it when it is material to guilt or punishment. Suppressing it violates due process “irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.”
What counts
- Directly exculpatory evidence — an alibi statement, forensic results excluding the defendant, a witness pointing at someone else.
- Impeachment evidence — anything that undermines a State witness’s credibility: deals, leniency, expectations of benefit, prior inconsistent statements, criminal exposure. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972); United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985). In a case built on incentivized witnesses, impeachment evidence is the case.
- Evidence held by police. The prosecution is charged with favorable evidence known to law enforcement even if the prosecutor never saw it. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995).
Materiality does not require proof the jury would have acquitted — only a “reasonable probability” of a different result, meaning the suppression “undermines confidence in the outcome.” Kyles, 514 U.S. at 434.
The evidence Tony Hunter’s jury never heard
Tony Hunter was convicted of the 2001 Greenwood Drive triple homicide in Monroe, Louisiana, on jailhouse informant testimony alone — no DNA, no fingerprints, no eyewitness. His filings identify five matters, each documented with the underlying records on the withheld evidence page:
- A second statement about the murder weapon pointing away from Mr. Hunter, which the defense says it never received.
- Clarence Kennedy’s plea and sentence — 25 years with 20 suspended for first-degree robbery, though the statute forbids suspension for that offense — while Kennedy testified he had been promised nothing and received nothing.
- Vaccara Comanche’s criminal exposure and treatment — a habitual-offender bill with potential life exposure dismissed thirty-nine days after Mr. Hunter’s indictment; sentencing records his jury never saw, obtained by counsel only in March 2025.
- The Gene Screen forensic report, dated January 30, 2002 — excluding Mr. Hunter from the scene, the victims, and the weapon.
- An alibi statement the defense never received, documenting where Mr. Hunter was the night of the killings.
Whether each item was in fact suppressed, and whether it was material, is exactly what the pending filings ask a court to decide. The distinction this site maintains everywhere applies here: these are the filings’ allegations, supported by the documents cited — no court has yet ruled in Mr. Hunter’s favor on them.
The other half
Every post-conviction application raising these claims has been denied — 2007, 2009, 2013, 2023, and the 2026 application denied that April. A federal habeas petition was dismissed as time-barred, leaving the disclosure claims without federal merits review. A supervisory writ application filed July 9, 2026 is pending in the Louisiana Second Circuit. (Full history: the appeals page.)
Read the records these claims rest on: the disclosure claims · the informants · the forensic record · the case timeline.