In Turner v. United States, the Supreme Court examined whether seven men convicted of a brutal murder in Washington D.C. had been denied their right to a fair trial because prosecutors failed to disclose evidence that could have helped their defense. The undisclosed evidence included statements from two brothers who said they committed the crime with another man and not the defendants, as well as forensic evidence suggesting more than one perpetrator was involved in the crime. However, by a 6-2 majority vote, the court ruled that even if this information had been disclosed at trial it would not have led to an acquittal given other strong circumstantial and direct evidence against them such as multiple confessions corroborated by other witnesses' testimony and physical evidences like blood stains on clothing matching victim's blood type.

In the dissenting opinion for Turner v. United States, Justice Kagan, joined by Justice Ginsburg, argued that the withheld evidence was material to the defense and could have led to a different outcome at trial. The suppressed evidence included statements from two witnesses who saw another man (not among those convicted) commit one of the murders and forensic evidence suggesting that this other suspect had been in contact with both victims shortly before their deaths. According to Kagan's dissenting view, if this information had been disclosed during discovery as required under Brady v. Maryland (1963), it would have significantly undermined confidence in the verdicts against seven men convicted for these crimes because it provided an alternative explanation consistent with some defendants' claims of innocence.