In September 2007, Philadelphia plainclothes police officers on patrol in an unmarked car observed Stanley Rodriguez conversing with the driver of a car stopped in the middle of the street. In plain view, Rodriguez passed a rolled-up book bag to the driver, who placed two rectangular objects wrapped in green tape into the bag and returned it to Rodriguez. One of the officers identified the objects as kilogram packages of cocaine from their shape and wrapping, and the officers followed Rodriguez. Alerted by a bystander to the police's presence, Rodriguez fled on foot, throwing the book bag onto the roof of a nearby garage. The officers apprehended Rodriguez, and then retrieved the book bag containing the two green-wrapped objects. Laboratory analysis subsequently determined the packages contained two kilograms of cocaine. Rodriguez was subsequently indicted for drug offenses. Prior to trial, the government informed Rodriguez that several officers involved in his arrest had been subject to complaints unrelated to his case [and were being] investigated by the Philadelphia Police Internal Affairs Division (IAD). The government subsequently informed Rodriguez that most of the investigations involved Officer Norman, whose credibility had been undermined in the course of an investigation and against whom one investigation remained open, but that allegations of improper search [activities] resulted in a finding of departmental violation against Officers Reynolds and Walker and remained open against Officers Betts, O'Malley, and McGrory. Rodriguez filed a motion for ....review of the internal affairs files concerning the open investigations, which the government opposed, noting in its brief that it did not intend to call Officer Norman. The District Court denied Rodriguez's motion, holding the IAD investigation into an alleged improper search was neither material nor exculpatory as required under Brady. Answer the following questions and support your answers with the law. 1. Does Rodriguez's Brady claim have merit? Why or why not? You must cite a case or the page in your textbook that supports your position. 2. Should Rodriguez have been allowed to call as witnesses the officers involved in arresting him? Why or why not? 3. What if Officer Norman had been convicted of a crime for his misconduct? Would that have altered the Brady inquiry? Why or why not