## Facts

- Tacoma police responded to a domestic dispute; Carbeania Grimes reported that her boyfriend, Troy Anthony Edwards, struck her with a gun and left with the gun and a black nylon bag.
- An officer observed Edwards driving a gray BMW near the residence; Edwards was arrested for assault.
- Police impounded the BMW and obtained a warrant to search for the gun; in the trunk they located a black nylon bag that contained no ownership identifiers.
- Officers opened the bag and observed suspected crack cocaine; they closed it and obtained a second warrant, ultimately finding eight baggies of crack cocaine and nearly seven kilograms of cocaine.
- The prosecution later relied heavily on a bail receipt bearing Edwards’s name, allegedly found crumpled under a cardboard bottom insert in the black bag.
- The receipt was discovered only after the bag—already admitted as an exhibit at the first trial—was removed from the courtroom by a government attorney and taken to the U.S. Attorney’s office, contrary to a local rule requiring exhibits to remain in the clerk’s custody.
- Edwards was convicted at his first trial; the conviction was reversed on unrelated grounds.
- At the second trial, the district court again admitted the bail receipt over Edwards’s objection; Edwards was convicted again.
- Edwards also challenged additional prosecution conduct at the second trial, including the government’s handling of a key witness after representing that the witness was unavailable.

## Issues

1. Whether admitting a bail receipt allegedly discovered after the government improperly removed and inspected an admitted exhibit violated due process and Edwards’s right to a fair trial.
2. Whether the government’s conduct regarding a key witness, together with the bail-receipt episode, cumulatively denied Edwards a fair trial.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed Edwards’s conviction from the second trial.
- The court held that admission of the bail receipt, obtained under circumstances that undermined the integrity of the evidence, contributed to denial of a fair trial.
- The court further determined that the challenged prosecutorial conduct, considered cumulatively with the receipt’s procurement and use, required reversal.

## Legal Principles

- Due process is violated when the government’s handling of physical evidence undermines confidence in the integrity and reliability of pivotal proof used to convict.
- Removal of an admitted exhibit from court custody in violation of rules designed to preserve chain of custody can create an unacceptable risk (or appearance) of tampering and can render later “discovered” evidence suspect.
- When the prosecution’s case depends on a late-found item that supplies the primary link between the defendant and contraband, trial fairness is compromised if the item’s discovery stems from improper government access to the exhibit.
- Prosecutorial actions that impede defense preparation or call into question the government’s candor, combined with questionable evidentiary practices, may warrant reversal based on cumulative prejudice.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit reversed because the government’s improper access to an admitted exhibit led to the late emergence of key inculpatory evidence, and the resulting reliability and fairness concerns—compounded by other prosecutorial conduct—denied Edwards due process at his second trial.


United States v. Edwards, 235 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir. 2000)