Metropolitan News-Enterprise

 

Monday, April 16, 2018

 

Page 1

 

Ninth Circuit:

Former Sheriff’s Deputy Fails in Effort to Show Acquittal on One Count Bars Retrial on Another

Defendant Faces Prosecution on Charge of Lying to FBI About Jail Beating

 

By a MetNews Staff Writer

 

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday affirmed the denial of a motion by a former Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy for dismissal of a charge of lying to the FBI based on his acquittal on related charges.

Byron Dredd was the sixth deputy indicted in connection with the 2011 beating in the county jail of a man who had come to visit his brother who was incarcerated there, was handcuffed when it was found he was carrying a cellphone which is unlawful when the intent is to supply it to an inmate, and, after, verbally abusing deputies, was punched, kicked, and subjected to pepper-spraying in the face.

Dredd, who was indicted months after the other deputies were convicted, was acquitted in 2016 by a jury of Count One, conspiracy, and Count Two, falsification of records, but jurors were deadlocked on Count Three, lying to FBI investigators. District Court Judge George H. King of the Central District of California rebuffed Dredd’s effort to block a retrial on Count Three, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed in a memorandum opinion.

The appeal was heard by Circuit Judges Consuelo Maria Callahan and Jacqueline Hong-Ngoc Nguyen, joined by District Court Judge Joseph F. Bataillon of the District of Nebraska, sitting by designation.

Issue Preclusion

Their opinion says that the “the issue preclusion component of the Double Jeopardy clause will apply and a jury’s acquittal will have preclusive force” if, in acquitting on one court, it decides a “critical issue” inherent in an unresolved count. But the opinion goes on to declare:

“Given the prosecution’s evidence, the parties’ closing arguments, and the jury instructions, Dredd has failed to meet his burden to demonstrate that the issue he seeks to foreclose from relitigation—his knowledge of the falsity of the statements he made to the FBI—was actually decided in his trial. After a realistic examination of the record, we agree with the district court’s conclusion that a jury could have rationally determined that Dredd did not have knowledge of the statements’ falsity in 2011. We find no error in the district court’s determination that the elements of the Count Three false-statement charge were not ‘necessarily decided’ in Dredd’s favor when the jury acquitted him on the Count Two falsification-of-records charge.”

Different Ground

The opinion adds.

“Further, collateral estoppel does not bar retrial if the jury could have realistically and rationally acquitted Dredd on a different ground….The jury may have acquitted Dredd of Count 2 because it did not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to obstruct a federal investigation, which was an element of the falsification of records charge.”

Dredd has contended that a higher-up in the department altered his incident report to facilitate a cover-up and that he told the truth to investigators.

The case is U.S.A. v. Dredd, No. 16-50406.

 

Copyright 2018, Metropolitan News Company