ADMIN

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Rounds | ushanka.us

The panel affirmed the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice, due to violations of Brady v. Maryland, an indictment charging Cliven Bundy; two of his sons, Ryan and Ammon Bundy; and Ryan Payne with obstructing federal law enforcement officials carrying out lawful court orders. The indictment followed a well-publicized effort by the Bureau of Land Management to impound Cliven Bundy’s cattle for a twenty-year failure to pay federal grazing fees.

Cliven Bundy and hundreds of armed supporters from around the United States forced federal officials to abandon the impoundment plan. Days into the defendants’ trial, the government began disclosing information in its possession that, under Brady, was arguably useful to the defense and should have been produced to the defendants well before trial. As additional documents came forth, the district court held a series of hearings, eventually deciding that the trial could not go forward and that the indictment must be dismissed with prejudice.

Reviewing whether the district court properly dismissed the indictment under its supervisory powers, the panel considered the evidence cited by the district court to decide * This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader whether substantial prejudice resulted from the Brady violations, whether flagrant misconduct occurred, and whether alternative remedies could have redressed the injury here.

Central to the government’s case were allegations that the defendants intentionally lied about being surrounded by snipers as a ploy to gather armed supporters. Had the defendants been able to proffer a basis for genuinely believing that government snipers surrounded the Bundy Ranch, they potentially could have negated the government’s scienter theory. Surveying all of the withheld evidence – including surveillance-camera evidence, FBI “302” investigative reports regarding snipers, Tactical Operations Center (TOC) log records, and threat assessments – the panel held that the record amply supports the district court’s conclusion that the defendants suffered substantial prejudice in not being able to prepare their case fully, refine their voir dire strategy, and make stronger opening statements.

Regarding the question of flagrant misconduct, the panel wrote that to the extent any government agencies or actors, through their own flagrant misconduct, failed to make known exculpatory information, the flagrant nature of such conduct will be imputed to the prosecution. The panel explained that flagrant misconduct need not be intentional; reckless disregard for the prosecution’s constitutional obligations is sufficient. Although it saw only negligence in the withholding of the TOC log records, the panel found no clear error in the district court’s conclusion that the withholding of the surveillance-camera evidence, the 302s, and the threat assessments crossed the threshold from negligence to recklessness.

The panel observed that the prosecution withheld facially exculpatory evidence that directly negated the government’s theory that the defendants lied about fearing snipers, and that the deliberate choices to withhold those documents were not cases of simple misjudgment. The panel wrote that although dismissal with prejudice requires a district court to find that “no lesser remedial action is available,” the panel understands by this phrase that a district court must conclude that no lesser remedy will fully address the damage caused by the government’s misconduct.

The panel concluded that the district court, which thoroughly considered the prejudicial effects, did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the indictment with prejudice. The panel wrote that lesser sanctions would have given the government an opportunity to strengthen its case at the defendants’ expense, and noted the related need to impose a sanction that will serve to deter future prosecutions from engaging in the same misconduct as occurred here.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/08/06/18-10287.pdf

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I pray to God that Trump is re-elected and I see the day Ocommunist goes to prison one can hope .  This was a travesty.  Dirty Harry Reid was involved up to his eyeballs. 

    • I believe Trump is going to be re-elected again, but the damage is already done there is no turning back when he is re-elected what I want to see him do is first he need to put Obama and his administration on trial and headed to jail if not we're going to see hatred as we've never seen before.

  • I want to say this Obama did something to the American turn on to each other and that is a disgrace to a nation and the world, I will blame this to Obama and his administration point and simple.

  • I think the murdered gentleman's name was Finnicum! He and a group had been "invited" to another city, up the road, to work out a "peace plan"; it was entrapment and they were ambushed, on the way there, by Oregon State Police and the FBI.  Everyone who participated in that ambush should be arrested, tried, convicted and hung until DEAD!

  • Hooray for the Bundys

  • Will anyone pay back all the money the Bundy's had to spend to defend themselves?  

  • This happened around 2014.Guess Who was President

    • Obama

    • Jug ears was super tight with his senator buddy from Nevada - who wanted the land to sell to the Chinese!  Corruption in every turn!

    • Right - -Dirty Harry Reid and his slimeball son, who still live in Searchlight, NV.  Military should drop an MOAB on them.

This reply was deleted.