Cornish v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Cornish's motion to modify his violation-of-probation sentence. It held that Cornish did not establish a Brady violation because there was no indication that evidence used against him had been compromised and no reasonable probability that disclosure of the OCME investigation would have changed the probation proceeding. The Court also held that the sentencing court acted within its discretion in considering the detective's testimony and imposing a sentence within the authority available for probation violations.