Mary Dobbie

DCCA Opinion (December 7, 2023)

Summary: n re Mary Chris Dobbie. Bar No. 975939. December 7, 2023. The D.C. Court of Appeals suspended Dobbie for six months, stayed in favor of one year’s probation with terms for violations of Rules 3.8(e), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d). While prosecuting several inmates at the District of Columbia Jail for an assault on a law enforcement officer during a fight, Dobbie intentionally failed to disclose to the defense evidence or information that she knew, or reasonably should have known, tended to negate the guilt of the accused. In addition, Dobbie engaged in dishonesty and conduct that seriously interfered with the administration of justice. Specifically, roughly six weeks before trial, Dobbie received a report that described several kinds of misconduct by a D.C. Jail correctional officer who was an important witness as to the identity of the accused inmates. Instead of providing the report to the defense, Dobbie filed it ex parte and under seal with the court and filed a motion in limine that purported to describe information in the report, but the summary of the report in the motion withheld exculpatory information. Rule 3.8(e) requires only intent to withhold disclosure of evidence or information that a prosecutor reasonably should know negates the guilt of the accused; it does not require intent to violate the rule. Judge Deahl dissented regarding the sanction, stating he did not agree with his colleagues that a six-month suspension from the practice of law was too harsh a sanction for the misconduct.

Board Report and Orders (January 13, 2021)

Summary: In re Mary Chris Dobbie. Bar No. 975939. January 13, 2021. The Board on Professional Responsibility recommended that the D.C. Court of Appeals suspend Dobbie for six months. While prosecuting several inmates at the District of Columbia Jail for an assault stemming from a fight in the jail, Dobbie intentionally failed to disclose to the defense evidence or information that she knew or reasonably should have known tended to negate the guilt of the accused in violation of Rule 3.8(e). Specifically, roughly six weeks before trial, Dobbie received a report that described several kinds of misconduct by a D.C. Jail correctional officer, who was an important witness about the identity of the accused inmates. Instead of providing the report to the defense, Dobbie filed it ex parte and under seal with the court and filed a motion in limine that purported to describe information in the report, but the summary of the report in the motion was defective. Rule 3.8(e) requires only intent to withhold disclosure of evidence or information that a prosecutor reasonably should know negates the guilt of the accused; it does not require intent to violate the Rule. In addition, Dobbie engaged in dishonesty and in conduct that seriously interfered with the administration of justice in violation of Rules 8.4(c) and 8.4(d).

Hearing Committee Report (June 18, 2020)

Summary: Not yet available.