Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Prosecutorial Misconduct


The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this morning in the case of Smith v. Cain, in which a New Orleans man is seeking a new trial because prosecutors failed to hand over key evidence.

In the case, Juan Smith argues that he was convicted of murders based on statements from an unreliable witness. Prosecutors didn’t give Smith’s lawyers documents that showed the witness’ inconsistent statements.

The Associated Press reported that several justices seemed surprised to hear  a New Orleans prosecutor argue that the office wasn’t required to turn over the evidence.

“Surely it should have been turned over,” Justice Antonin Scalia said at one point. “Why don’t you give that up?”

Read more about today’s arguments

from the Associated Press

, read the

full transcript


read briefs filed in the case

– including an amicus brief from the Innocence Network.

Smith v. Cain

reaches the court on the heels of another Louisiana prosecutorial misconduct case. In

Connick v. Thompson

, the court ruled 5-4 to strip exoneree John Thompson of a $14 million civil court award, saying the prosecutor’s office could not be held liable for failing to properly train prosecutors on their ethical obligations.  

Last month, Thompson joined with the Innocence Project and partner organizations to launch the Prosecutorial

Oversight campaign, a national tour and dialogue to address issues of prosecutorial misconduct.

Visit the campaign website to join the dialogue today


Leave a Reply

Thank you for visiting us. You can learn more about how we consider cases here. Please avoid sharing any personal information in the comments below and join us in making this a hate-speech free and safe space for everyone.

This field is required.
This field is required.
This field is required.

We've helped free more than 240 innocent people from prison. Support our work to strengthen and advance the innocence movement.