2017 Investigative Summary 1

Investigation of Alleged Improper Closing or Rebuttal Argument

A DOJ attorney reported to OPR judicial criticism of her closing argument, during which she vouched for the credibility of government witnesses and bolstered the government’s case by arguing the appropriateness of the government’s prosecution.

OPR conducted an investigation and concluded that the attorney acted in reckless disregard of her obligations not to state a personal opinion as to the credibility of a witness or the justness of a case by impermissibly arguing that the government’s witnesses had testified truthfully, the defendant’s witnesses had an incentive to lie, and that the government had no motive to prosecute an innocent man.

OPR referred its findings to the PMRU, which upheld OPR’s findings and issued a formal reprimand. At the direction of the PMRU, OPR notified the state bar of its findings.