When leverage becomes misconduct.
Aggressive prosecution is not automatically misconduct. The line is crossed when the government violates constitutional or ethical duties.
Three rules every federal prosecutor is held to
Brady
Brady v. Maryland, 1963
Withholding favorable evidence
The prosecution violates due process when it suppresses evidence favorable to the accused that is material to guilt or punishment. The rule does not depend on whether the suppression was done in good faith or bad faith.
Napue
Napue v. Illinois, 1959
False or misleading testimony
Due process is violated when the prosecution knowingly allows false testimony to stand uncorrected.
Giglio
Giglio v. United States
Undisclosed deals with witnesses
Giglio extended the principle to impeachment evidence, including undisclosed promises or inducements that affect a government witness's credibility.
What the record supports
Each of these statements is backed by the decisions on the cases page.
Federal courts have repeatedly reversed convictions or dismissed prosecutions when the government suppressed exculpatory or impeachment evidence.
The Justice Department's own Office of Professional Responsibility found Brady and Giglio violations in the prosecution of Senator Ted Stevens.
Federal appellate courts have affirmed dismissals with prejudice where discovery violations and prosecutorial misconduct caused substantial prejudice.