# United States v. Anthony F. Wright

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · December 27, 1973 · 489 F.2d 1181

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9460157

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America v. Anthony F. WRIGHT, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** December 27, 1973
- **Citations:** 489 F.2d 1181; 160 U.S. App. D.C. 57
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by MacKINNON
- **Judges:** Bazelon, Wright, MacKinnon
- **Cited by:** 104 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9460157

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the prosecutor improperly directed the jury, in its deliberations, to consider the defendant’s demeanor during trial
- finding error in a prosecutor's comment that defendant found the trial humorous and in prosecution's instruction to the jury, made with the district court's approval, that it could "definitely consider [the defendant's] demeanor in [its] deliberations"
- reversing conviction on direct appeal based on 28 prosecutor’s comment that the jury could use non-testifying defendant’s courtroom demeanor as 1 evidence of guilt
- rejecting the idea that the defendant's "courtroom behavior off the witness stand is in any sense legally relevant to the question of his guilt or innocence"

## Opinion text

MacKINNON, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I see no privilege in the report of an investigator for the defense to the extent that it contains statements of witnesses (not the defendant). I accordingly believe that the court properly ordered it to be produced. Investigative reports of the Government are required to be turned over to the defense when they contain facts contrary to those testified in court and I would apply the same standard to investigators for the defense. Since I find no error in the trial I would accordingly affirm the judgment of conviction.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9460157. Public record. Not legal advice.