Types of Misconduct An examination of OPR case data for the past 12 fiscal years shows that, among the more severe violations—those that involve recklessness or intentional wrongdoing and are defined by the Department as professional misconduct—OPR substantiated: 48 allegations that federal attorneys misled courts, including 20 instances in which OPR determined that the violations were intentional 29 allegations that federal prosecutors failed to provide exculpatory information to defendants, including 1 instance OPR concluded was intentional 13 allegations that Justice Department personnel violated constitutional or civil rights 4 allegations of abuse of investigative or prosecutorial authority or general prosecutorial misconduct, including 3 instances in which OPR determined that the violations were intentional 3 allegations that prosecutors abused the grand jury or indictment process 1 allegation of “overzealous prosecution” POGO requested information on OPR investigations through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to augment the limited information available in OPR’s annual reports and data for the years 2004 through 2007 previously obtained through FOIA by governmentattic.org.[2] OPR annual reports contain statistics on allegations it received and investigations it conducted. They also include summaries of closed investigations. The past two annual reports provide a statistical breakdown of its investigative findings by infraction category. During the 12-year period that POGO examined, OPR investigated about 2,100 allegations and substantiated about 650. Examples of Misconduct Among numerous investigations in which misconduct was found in fiscal year 2012, the most recent year for which OPR has issued an annual report,[3] OPR described these examples: A DOJ attorney failed to provide information to the defense that could have been used to counter a key witness for the prosecution. The DOJ attorney failed to disclose that, before the trial, another witness had implicated the key witness in the crime and had contradicted the key witness’s testimony. (The Department gave the DOJ attorney a 10-day suspension.)[4] A DOJ prosecutor developed a “close personal relationship” with the defendant in a case he was prosecuting, “had numerous personal contacts” with the defendant without the consent of the defendant’s lawyer, and, without telling his supervisors at the Justice Department, negotiated a plea agreement permitting release of the defendant from custody. (When the annual report was written, the Department had not determined what punishment, if any, to impose.)[5] A DOJ attorney was assigned a criminal case with 15 months remaining under the statute of limitations, the amount of time the government is given by law to file charges. He allowed the “clear and unambiguous” time limit to expire without filing charges or alerting the Department about the impending deadline so it could decide what to do. (The Department gave the DOJ attorney “a letter of admonishment.”)[6] An immigration judge—immigration courts fall within the Justice Department—made disparaging remarks about foreign nationals, showed bias, and violated procedural standards in cases where defendants were “contesting removal proceedings”—in other words, fighting to stay in the United States. (The Department gave the immigration judge a 30-day suspension.)[7] A DOJ attorney failed “to timely disclose to the defense a tape recording of the crime despite repeated defense requests for the information,” and falsely told the court that the government had no evidence that a key witness had been diagnosed with a mental illness. (The Department gave the attorney a 14-day suspension.)[8] - See more at: pogo.org/our-work/reports/2014/hundreds-of-justice-attorneys-violated-standards.html?print=t#sthash.mulWI2bV.hkhwWfFi.dpuf
Posted on: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 12:00:42 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015