Lawmakers Hear Proposals To Standardize Brady-Giglio Process

The proposals aim to establish uniform procedures and define due process rights for law enforcement officers.

The Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee heard two bills on Feb. 26 that would create a uniform process for defining Brady-Giglio impairments and establish due process rights for law enforcement officers. The bills, SF 599 and SF 1813, were laid over for further stakeholder discussions.

A week earlier, on Feb. 19, the House Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee heard HF 962 and its DE-1 amendment (pdf), sponsored by Committee Chair Rep. Paul Novotny (R–Elk River). This bill shares similar goals with the Senate proposals.

Brady-Giglio background

Brady-Giglio refers to legal rules requiring prosecutors in criminal cases to disclose certain information about testifying peace officers with the defense to ensure a fair trial. The rules stem from two U.S. Supreme Court cases:

• Brady v. Maryland (1963)
• Giglio v. United States (1972)

“Brady-Giglio lists” are records maintained by prosecuting agencies that document peace officers with credibility concerns that could affect their reliability as witnesses. Prosecutors are obligated to disclose this information to defense attorneys.

However, many stakeholders agree the Brady-Giglio rules are applied inconsistently across the state. Past legislative proposals on this topic stalled due to disagreements over what uniform standards should be applied.

City prosecutors, like other prosecuting agencies, must comply with Brady-Giglio disclosure obligations. Additionally, city attorneys play a dual role in advising cities on managing employee discipline or discharge, including in situations that involve Brady-Giglio matters.

Ensuring due process for officers

The two Senate bills aim to address Brady-Giglio designations for peace officers and establish procedures for managing officers with credibility issues. Both proposals would:

• Require officers to receive written notice before being designated as Brady-Giglio
• Allow officers to submit input and request reconsideration.
• Protect the confidentiality of officers’ personnel records.

Key bill differences

• SF 599, sponsored by Judy Seeberger (DFL-Afton), would prohibit the discharge and discipline of officers based solely on Brady-Giglio impairment.
• SF 1813, sponsored by Bonnie Weslin (DFL-Plymouth), would require annual coordination between prosecuting agencies and law enforcement employers.

Defining Brady-Giglio impairments

A goal of both bills is to establish a state-wide standard for handling Brady-Giglio designations. A uniform definition of impairment would ensure consistency, efficiency, and transparency across all prosecuting agencies’ Brady-Giglio lists, protecting the rights of officers and defendants alike.

Testimony on proposals

The hearings included testimony from many members of stakeholder groups, including the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, Minnesota Sheriff’s Association, Hennepin County Attorney’s Office (HCAO), Minnesota County Attorneys Association, and MN Board of Public Defense. The League of Minnesota Cities submitted written testimony, as did the Minnesota American Civil Liberties Union and HCAO.

• Read the League’s written testimony on the Brady-Giglio proposals (pdf).
• View a recording of the Senate hearing on the Brady-Giglio.
• View a recording of the House hearing on HF 962 starting at timestamp 1:00:00.

Your next step

Committee Chair Sen. Ron Latz (DFL-St. Louis Park) urged stakeholders to continue working toward a balanced approach that reflects the interests of all parties. The League remains engaged in these discussions and welcomes input from city officials and city attorneys. City input is appreciated and can be sent directly to Tori Kee, LMC intergovernmental relations representative and attorney.

Read more news articles.