- 282 - that the Court was called upon to review in the trial of the test cases. We also observe that, upon discovery of Messrs. McWade's and Sims' misconduct, respondent promptly reported the matter to the Court. Respondent's actions upon discovery of the misconduct and respondent's overall conduct in these proceedings exhibit respondent's institutional good faith. Further, we are not convinced that justice would be served if we were to adopt the extraordinary remedy, after the evidentiary hearing and our review of the record, of renouncing the Court's deficiency determinations in Dixon II. Consistent with the views stated earlier in this opinion, we are convinced that the test case petitioners were afforded a fair trial, despite the Government misconduct, and that the Government misconduct was not material to the outcome in Dixon II. We are firmly convinced that the outcome of the retrial of the test cases would be the same if we were to order a new trial. Moreover, more discriminating remedies are available both to punish the offenders and to deter similar conduct in the future, see Alexander v. Robertson, 882 F.2d at 425. Considering all the facts and circumstances, we will--with the exceptions discussed below--reinstate the decisions entered in the test cases remaining before the Court.Page: Previous 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011