False Evidence

Example

John Brooks, an associate at a law firm, is indicted for embezzlement. To escape justice, Brooks forges documents that frame his rival, Samantha Samuels, as the culprit. Yet a careful review of the documents reveals that they were forged, and Brooks is forced to admit having used false evidence to defend himself.

Case Examples

• If a person is convicted of a crime based on false evidence that the prosecution knew was false, the conviction violates the Fourteenth Amendment. See Hayes v. Brown, 399 F.3d 972, 978 (9th Cir. 2005). Prosecutors also violate the Fourteenth Amendment if they do not call out and correct false evidence when it appears. Id. In Hayes, an inmate challenged his conviction on the basis that one of the prosecution’s witnesses lied on the stand about striking a deal with the prosecution in exchange for his testimony. Id. While the prosecution might not have known the witness would lie when the question was asked, the prosecution did nothing to correct the witness’s false testimony. Id. Due in part to the witness’s false testimony, the jury convicted the inmate. Id. The inmate presented evidence to the court that the witness had lied on the stand and the prosecution had not corrected the false testimony. Based on this evidence, the court overturned his conviction. Id. In its decision, the Court reasoned, “the state violates a criminal defendant's right to due process of law when, although not soliciting false evidence, it allows false evidence to go uncorrected when it appears.” Hayes v. Brown, 399 F.3d 972, 978 (9th Cir. 2005).
• Courts have further found that whether false evidence is material to the case is a question of both law and fact. See Nobles v. Johnson, 127 F.3d 409, 416 (5th Cir. 1997). False evidence is material when its inclusion either changed or likely changed the outcome of the case. Id.
• What about evidence the prosecution withholds from the defense? The Supreme Court has stated that “evidence withheld by government is material as would require reversal of conviction, only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 105 S. Ct. 3375, 87 L. Ed. 2d 481 (1985). In Bagley, the Government was found to have concealed evidence from the defense that the defense could have used to impeach the Government’s witnesses, showing bias or an interest in how the case turned out. Id. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction, stating that such evidence was material and the prosecution was guilty of allowing false evidence; if the evidence had been included, it might have changed the jurors’ minds regarding Bagley’s guilt. Id.