Ward and Smith's appellate attorneys Alex Dale and Chris Edwards have recently filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (APA) in a case with significant implications for the justice system.
The Background
The core issue centers around the definition of absolute prosecutorial immunity. It stems from a case involving an assistant district attorney (ADA) who interviewed a witness for a murder trial. The witness's testimony, later deemed false, resulted in a conviction that was subsequently overturned.
While prosecutors are generally immune from suits that challenge their advocacy, they do not enjoy absolute immunity for their investigative acts. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit determined that the ADA's witness interview was an investigation, not advocacy, thus stripping him of absolute immunity and exposing the prosecutor to civil liability.
The Importance of the APA's Involvement
Recognizing the potential impact of the Court's decision, the APA—a national nonprofit representing a diverse group of prosecuting attorneys—filed the amicus brief in support of the ADA. The brief, crafted by Alex and Chris, aims to provide the court with a comprehensive understanding of the broader implications of the legal issues at hand, particularly from the perspective of prosecuting attorneys across the nation.
Alex Dale emphasized the importance of this case:
"The Third Circuit's ruling could set a dangerous precedent that undermines the independence of prosecutors. It's crucial for the Supreme Court to address this issue to ensure that prosecutors can perform their duties without fear of personal liability."
Key Arguments in the Brief
The amicus brief meticulously outlines several key arguments:
Erosion of Absolute Immunity: The Third Circuit's decision undermines prosecutorial independence by denying immunity for certain prosecutorial actions, specifically post-charge witness interviews.
Circuit Split: There's a split among circuit courts on whether post-charge witness interviews are advocacy or investigation, leading to inconsistent liability rules across the country.
Impact on Conviction Review Units: Limiting immunity could hinder the work of conviction review units that help exonerate wrongfully convicted individuals, as it may expose prosecutors to civil liability.
"The APA wanted to present a unified stance on the prosecutorial-immunity issue," noted Chris Edwards. "This case highlights the need for clarity in the law. The current circuit split creates a patchwork of legal standards, which is untenable for prosecutors who need to know the boundaries of their legal protections."
The brief urges the Supreme Court to grant the petition for a writ of certiorari to clarify the scope of absolute prosecutorial immunity, ensure consistent legal standards across jurisdictions, and protect the vital work of conviction review units.
