“Black drivers have a problem in Richmond, Virginia. Richmond Police Department (‘RPD’) officers stop Black drivers five times more frequently than white drivers.”
These are the opening lines in United States v. Kieth Moore, No. 3:21-cr-00042 (E.D.V.A. Feb. 12, 2024) (opinion), dismissing an indictment for felon-in-possession of a firearm after finding that Mr. Moore had proven selective prosecution involving RPD traffic stops.
Congratulations to Assistant Federal Defenders Laura Koenig, Amy Austin, and the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Eastern District of Virginia for their great work!
The full 25-page opinion is worth a close read because it shows how the effective use of experts and data can be used to support a selective prosecution claim. What’s more, in rejecting the government’s motion to exclude expert testimony, the court emphasized the relevance and admissibility of expert testimony to establish these claims.
The opinion ends this way:
[I]n 2020, the Commonwealth of Virginia began to require police to keep track of the race of people stopped. This data was essential to this case. It shows a disgraceful disparity in enforcement of traffic laws, with Black drivers getting the short end of the stick. Richmond is not the only locality with this problem; the state wide statistics show a remarkable record of picking on Black drivers. And subsequent reports by the Commonwealth show that the trend continues. One would think that Virginia's citizens would cry out in protest over this situation, but they don't.
Moore, however, did raise this issue. He has successfully shown both the discriminatory effect and discriminatory purpose elements required for his selective enforcement claim. The Court will therefore grant his motion to dismiss the indictment.