Allen v. United States

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals held that the prosecutor improperly asked the defendant whether he knew why police witnesses would lie against him, because a witness may not be asked to comment on another witness's credibility. The court concluded that the error was prejudicial because credibility was central to the case, the questioning was repeated and emphasized in closing argument, and the jury struggled during deliberations. The convictions were reversed and the case was remanded for a new trial.

Holdings

1. A prosecutor may not ask a criminal defendant to explain why another witness would lie, testify falsely, or otherwise comment on that witness's credibility. The prohibition applies without fine distinctions among different phrasings of the inquiry.
2. The preserved error was not harmless because the questioning was repeated, directly affected the central credibility dispute, was emphasized in closing argument, and occurred in a case the jury struggled to resolve.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the prosecutor improperly asked Allen to explain why the police witnesses would lie against him.
2. Whether the preserved error in allowing that questioning was harmless or required reversal of Allen's convictions.
3. Whether Allen's additional challenge to the trial court's response to a jury question should be decided.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded