Ronald White authored an article for Law360 covering the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) motion to dismiss the charges in U.S. v. Michael Flynn, and how this decision could assist other federal criminal defendants and make future prosecutions of false statement cases more difficult for the government.
According to Ronald, the DOJ’s motion in the Flynn case “may serve as a useful precedent for defendants in false statement cases to seek discovery of, and offer evidence at trial, regarding such issues.”
“These concessions by the DOJ should carry weight in future cases for a number of reasons,” he added. “To begin with, the government’s arguments cannot be dismissed as simply the position of a single assistant U.S. attorney or a single U.S. attorney’s office. Instead, as he acknowledged in interviews, they were formulated and endorsed by the attorney general himself. In addition, the Flynn prosecution cannot be distinguished in future cases are representing some sort of unique case; absent the fact that Flynn was a White House adviser, the facts of his case amount to the run-of-the-mill false statement prosecution not unlike ones seen every day in federal courtrooms.”
Read the full article.