UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Olabimpe K. ADETAYO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-4660
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 16, 2017. Decided: March 24, 2017
216
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART
Jamеs Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Meghan Skelton, Appellate Attоrney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Hollis Weisman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Aрpellee.
Before MOTZ, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Olabimpe K. Adetayo appeals from the distriсt court‘s order affirming the magistrate judge‘s judgment of conviction for impeding or interfering with an officer in the performance of offiсial duties, in violation of
Adetayo first alleges that the magistrate judgе erred by denying her motion to dismiss the criminal complaint, arguing that the Government violated her due process rights by destroying the video recording of the incident giving rise to her convictions. In evaluating the denial of a motion to dismiss, we review the district court‘s factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. United States v. Abramski, 706 F.3d 307, 313-14 (4th Cir. 2013); Unitеd States v. Woolfolk, 399 F.3d 590, 594 (4th Cir. 2005).
The state‘s failure to disclose evidencе favorable to an accused violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, “irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.” Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). By contrast, where the state fails to preserve potentially useful evidence, such failure does not violate the Due Process Clause unless the defendant can show bad faith. Illinois v. Fisher, 540 U.S. 544, 547-48, 124 S.Ct. 1200, 157 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2004) (citing
Bad faith “requires that the officer have intentionally withheld the evidence for the purpose of depriving thе plaintiff of the use of that evidence during h[er] criminal trial.” Jean v. Collins, 221 F.3d 656, 663 (4th Cir. 2000). The negligеnt destruction of evidence, without more, does not constitute bad faith. See Elmore v. Ozmint, 661 F.3d 783, 831 (4th Cir. 2011) (finding the negligent erasure of the tape of a bank robbery was not bad faith). We have reviewed the record on aрpeal and the parties’ arguments with these standards in mind and find no reversible error in the magistrate judge‘s denial of the motion to dismiss.
In her seсond claim, Adetayo contends that the magistrate judge improperly declined to apply an adverse inference against the Government that unpreserved video surveillance footage would have been favorable to her. We discern no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument beсause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Apрellee, v. Owerrie Davon BACON, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-4440
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 3, 2017. Decided: March 24, 2017
217
Before KEENAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Owerrie Bacon pled guilty to being a fеlon in possession of a firearm, in violation of