United States v. Gray-Burriss, No. 13-3041 (D.C. Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseDefendant, convicted of fraud and embezzlement, argued that the district court erred in excluding two defense exhibits at trial. The fraud and embezzlement was in connection with defendant's management of a union of private security guards. The court concluded that it was error to exclude one of the defense exhibits, an employment contract, and remanded for the district court to determine whether that additional evidence affects defendant's sentence. In this case, the contract was potentially a significant piece of exculpatory evidence; the government has not identified any prejudice it would have suffered from the defense's use of the exhibit; and the district court did not find that the defense withheld the disputed contract in bad faith. Although the court rejected defendant’s conflict-of-interest theory, the court follows this circuit’s usual practice and remanded most of his ineffective assistance claims for initial determination by the district court.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.