Michael Harris, Appellant v. United States, Appellee (D.C. 2003)

Summary

The court held that an assistant United States attorney adopted, on behalf of the government, the affidavit's conclusion that probable cause existed to believe that Donald Monroe and Charles Minnis conspired to murder Harris, making that conclusion admissible as an adoptive admission. The court also held that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to send marshals to secure the appearance of a favorable, material defense witness whose testimony would have corroborated Harris's self-defense account. Because the errors were not harmless, the court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial.

Holding

Admissibility of the search-warrant affidavit's probable-cause conclusion. By approving and authorizing submission of the affidavit to the court, the assistant United States attorney manifested the government's adoption of the conclusion that probable cause existed to believe Donald Monroe and Charles Minnis conspired to murder Harris. That conclusion was an adoptive admission admissible at Harris's request, although whether the government adopted other subordinate facts in the affidavit must be determined by the trial court based on the surrounding circumstances.

Failure to secure the defense witness. The trial court abused its discretion by refusing to send marshals to locate and secure Drummond, because his proposed testimony was favorable and material corroboration rather than cumulative evidence, and the court lacked a sufficient factual basis to conclude that efforts to locate him would be futile.

Michael Harris, Appellant v. United States, Appellee

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by