Opinion ID: 199406
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Law Applied by the District Court

Text: 47 Our first task is to determine whether the district court applied the correct legal test to the evidence in considering Conley's motion for new trial. According to the court's repeated formulation, Conley, 103 F. Supp.2d at 55-58, the central question is whether the government withheld newly discovered evidence in violation of its obligations to Conley. The court stated that the core of Conley's argument is that the prosecutor had a legally cognizable duty of disclosure of the testimony it expected to occur at the civil trial to defense counsel. Id. at 56. It expressly considered the conflicts and contradictions in the record as a whole, now considered with the newly discovered evidence before it. Id. Furthermore, the court referred to potentially decisive questions to be considered in deciding whether to grant a new trial in this case, grounded on the claim of newly discovered evidence. Id. at 57 (emphasis added). 6 48 Because Conley's claim is based on the government's failure to disclose newly discovered evidence, the analysis of whether a new trial is in the interests of justice must be performed with regard to Wright and/or Brady. 7 See Montilla-Rivera, 115 F.3d at 1064-65. The only permissible way the district court could order a new trial was to apply the legal standards for newly discovered evidence, which it initially set forth in Section III of its opinion, 103 F. Supp.2d at 48-49. The district court abandoned that analysis, however, and applied a different standard, one that seems to be highly discretionary and contains no reference to prejudice or materiality. See id. at 55 (deciding that a new trial will be granted on grounds that are entirely independent of issues in Wright analysis); id. at 58 (stating that whether Conley was prejudiced cannot be determined under Wright and Brady, but exercising jurisdiction to allow a new trial nonetheless). The court's application of that standard -- which it acknowledges is unprecedented -- constitutes reversible error.