I would say yes to your "hypothetical" questions but with a hitch/caveat.

The law is relatively clear that it's the prosecutor's responsibility to disclose exculpatory evidence. I'm to assume the prosecutor in this case was unaware of the Agent's knowledge and information. If so, it can't be the prosecutor's fault because they don't know what they don't know. That stated, there have been recent civil cases and rulings against law enforcement officials having knowledge of exculpatory evidence and withholding it. It's definitely not seen as criminal.

Morally??? I'm not sure how someone can let an innocent person (at least innocent of murder in this case) rot in prison for something the person didn't do.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

Would that fall under the category of obstruction of justice?

---

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

not to mention if that state did not stop the death penalty as the time.. the guy might have been executed ? if we are talking about the same hypothetical

Basically nothing happens to prosecutors for misconduct. Here is a rare instance where a prosecutor did get in trouble for withholding exculpatory evidence and an innocent man sat in prison for 25 years.

The prosecutor got 10 days, served 5. Our justice system apparently does not give a shit about misconduct.

https://www.google.com/...00%3ftemplate=ampart

---

who's smarter than you're? i'm!

Local dirtbag Kenny Hulshof has been punished severely By falling upward into a position as lobbyist and attorney for Polsinelli in Washington. Disgusting.

“In at least 13 murder cases, defense lawyers have alleged misconduct by Hulshof or others involved in prosecutions that he either assisted or led. In six of those, courts have thrown out convictions or overturned death sentences. In a seventh case, Missouri’s governor commuted the defendant’s death sentence to life in prison.”

http://truthinjustice.org/hulshof-questions.htm

Actually I didn't have any case in particular in mind. I just started this thread based on a conversation I overhead at lunch. I was just skimming through the Washington Post and I stumbled on this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/...m_term=.4cecdc2f3f01

In 1998, U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Donald Stern needed someone to look into allegations that the FBI had been protecting mob leaders in Boston. One of them was Irish mob boss James “Whitey” Bulger. This was a big case, involving potential misdeeds by high-ranking federal law enforcement agents. And Stern knew who he wanted. “We didn’t go to Washington with a list,” Stern later told the Associated Press. “We went to Washington and said, ‘We want John Durham to do it.' ” John Durham did it. The new special prosecutor’s work would lead to the overturning of four 1968 murder convictions after he unearthed secret documents revealing an FBI informant had framed the men. By 2002, he secured the conviction of retired FBI agent John Connolly, who had protected Bulger and top associate Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi.

lawyers: regardless of the criminal angles, what's the civil recourse here? surely if someone wrongly sends you to jail for decades you could absolutely soak them in civil court?

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

Why are most people here responding with answers to what should happen to the prosecutor? The prosecutor was never mentioned in the OP.

From the OP's hypothetical situation, we can assume that the Prosecutor is not aware of the information the DEA agent knows.

I think the question is what happens to the DEA agent in this case.

yeah, that occurred to me too.

again, not sure what the criminal law is - is there an exception for exculpatory evidence that would otherwise compromise an ongoing investigation? was this a jury trial? can that kind of evidence be entered in camera? is that a thing in the US?

but i'd hope that in civil court the wrongly convicted would have a chance to clobber the DEA agent who sat on exculpatory evidence.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

That likely would be a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 (or, if the LEO is federal, a Bivens lawsuit). The individual would be named as a defendant and probably the agency he/she worked for and the city/county/state would likely be named as well for the "deep pockets" factor.

---

''The enemy isn't conservatism. The enemy isn't liberalism. The enemy is bulls**t.''

—Lars-Erik Nelson

Unfortunately we seem to have handed the reigns to the world over to lawyers and there's shit on both sides of that coin both defence and prosecution.

---

..........................................................................

This man is a law enforcement officer and therefore sworn to uphold the law. Purposefully withholding evidence is against the law, correct? If he intentionally subverts the law by withholding evidence he should receive the same sentence the man received when found guilty. Giving the actual guilty party the accused sentence would probably change how some people in law enforcement acted. However, there will always be those who believe they can cheat the system.

Is there a way to legally withhold evidence?

I am not a lawyer so this is all a guess.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

The Director of the FBI back then , One Robert Muller should have been a charged too . 2 of those guys died in prison. Even after the outher two got out the director fought against the $100,000,000 awarded to those guys .