was not material. The failure to disclose this information undermines confidence in the verdict, and we, therefore, reverse the district court’s denial of habeas relief on this claim. There are three components of a Brady claim: (1) the evidence at issue must be favorable to the accused, either because it is exculpatory or because it is impeaching; (2) the evidence must have been suppressed by the State, either willfully or inadvertently; and (3) prejudice must have ensued. Strickler, 527 U.S. at 281-82, 119 S.Ct. 1936. The prosecution’s suppression of evidence favorable to an accused violates due process where the evidence is material, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution. Brady, 373 U.S. at 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194; see Kyles, 514 U.S. at 437, 115 S.Ct. 1555 (<HOLDING>). Evidence is material if “there is a
holding that duty to disclose not neutralized because evidence was in the hands of the police rather than the prosecutor holding that the brady rule encompasses evidence known only to police investigators but not the prosecutor holding state has affirmative duty to disclose favorable and material evidence to defense holding that police officers have no affirmative duty to search out favorable evidence for the defendant holding that an individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the governments behalf in the case including the police