United States v. Bowen
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
799 F.3d 336 (2015)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Five police officers in New Orleans, Louisiana, (the police officers) (defendants) shot a group of unarmed men, killing two and injuring others. The police then orchestrated a cover-up. The police officers were tried in federal court and convicted on felony charges. However, it then became known that several federal prosecutors had been posting anonymous, online comments about the trial throughout its duration. The government disciplined the prosecutors after a lengthy investigation fraught with delays. The police officers moved for a new trial, arguing that prosecutorial misconduct created a prejudicial atmosphere that had a negative impact on the outcome of their case. The police officers did not demonstrate that evidence of the prosecutors’ misconduct, if presented at a new trial, would result in an acquittal. The federal government (defendant) challenged, arguing that a new trial could not be granted unless the police officers presented evidence that there was a specific prejudice to the verdict. The district court granted a new trial, holding that (1) specific prejudice is not a prerequisite to granting a new trial; and (2) a new trial was warranted because it was impossible to accurately measure the impact of the prosecutors’ misconduct on the jury and the fundamental fairness of the trial. The federal government appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
Dissent (Prado, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.