United States v. Paul Michael Mitchell
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DONALD RUSSELL, Circuit Judge:
This case presents us with the question of whether prosecutorial overreaching was sufficiently egregious in this case to require reversal. The alleged error arose out of the repetition throughout the testimony and argument of counsel of inadmissible and prejudicial evidence. The rule in connection with prosecutorial overreaching has been stated in many opinions. That rule has been framed as the maxim that “fi]t is often said and often forgotten that the duty of a prosecuting attorney is not to convict defendants but to try them fairly.” McFarland v. United…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by122 opinions
- United States v. Dustin John HiggsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. BaptisteCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2010
- United States v. Ricardo U. Alerre, United States of America v. Deborah Bordeaux, United States of America v. Michael D. JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Keith McGillCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2016
- United States v. Ronald Collins, United States of America v. Ronald CollinsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2005
117 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.