United States v. Thaddeus Beaulieu, 973 F.3d 354

Beaulieu told the FBI about accomplices in robberies; the Government sought his testimony at trial but he invoked the Fifth and refused to testify.
On April 26 DOJ granted Beaulieu use-and-derivative-use immunity under 18 U.S.C. §§ 6002–6003, but he still refused to testify at the next hearing.
The district court appointed AUSA Michael McMahon to prosecute Beaulieu for criminal contempt; defense alleged McMahon was a material witness and had threatened prosecution if Beaulieu’s testimony differed from an FBI 302.
At trial defense counsel Cynthia Cimino testified that McMahon had warned he would ‘‘prosecute to the full extent’’ if Beaulieu’s testimony deviated; McMahon repeatedly disputed that testimony from counsel’s table and cross-examined Cimino.
During closing McMahon made arguments the Government later conceded were improper (arguing facts not in evidence and urging verdicts to avoid disrespecting the judge); the jury convicted Beaulieu.
On appeal the Government conceded prosecutorial misconduct; the Fifth Circuit found the misconduct prejudiced Beaulieu’s right to a fair trial and vacated the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Judge recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)	No basis; judge impartial	Judge’s comments showed bias requiring recusal	Forfeited on appeal (argument not adequately developed); no relief
Recusal under Fed. R. Crim. P. 42(a)(3)	Not applicable	Judge criticized defendant; rule applies	Rule 42(a)(3) not triggered because contempt was refusal to testify, not disrespect
Prosecutor as witness/prosecutor conflict	Appointment appropriate; objections insufficient	McMahon was a material witness and his role tainted trial	Court found McMahon acted as witness-prosecutor; misconduct established
Prosecutorial misconduct and prejudice	Misconduct did not make verdict unreliable	Misconduct (argument on facts not in evidence, personal opinion, urging verdict to honor judge) infected trial	Misconduct prejudiced substantial rights; conviction vacated

Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972) (use-and-derivative-use immunity suffices to compel testimony)
Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194 (1968) (right to jury trial when sentence exceeds certain threshold)
United States v. Allen, 587 F.3d 246 (5th Cir. 2009) (elements of criminal contempt; willfulness standard)
United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1 (1985) (prosecutorial misconduct doctrine; limits on improper argument)
Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168 (1986) (prosecutorial remarks require reversal only if they render trial fundamentally unfair)
United States v. Mendoza, 522 F.3d 482 (5th Cir. 2008) (factors for assessing prejudice from prosecutorial remarks)
Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935) (prosecutor’s duty to seek justice, not merely conviction)
Fed. Power Comm’n v. Metro. Edison Co., 304 U.S. 375 (1938) (willfulness requirement protects good-faith refusals)