No Right to Discovery as to Possible Selective Prosecution in Prosecution for Burning Police Car at George Floyd Protest

Nathan Wilson and Christopher Beasley allegedly joined a protest in Santa Monica , California , and set fire to a police car.

They were both federally indicted on one count of arson.

Defendants moved to dismiss their indictment, arguing that they were unconstitutionally singled out for prosecution based on perception that they held anti-government views.

The panel held that defendants weren't entitled to "discovery on their selective-prosecution claim".

The district court found that the Defendants proved "some evidence" of discriminatory intent because it concluded that the government "may have identified, as 'anti-government extremists," individuals accused of engaging in criminal activity during the George Floyd protests.

The Sixth Circuit reversed the district court's selective-prosecution discovery order and its dismissal of the Defendants ' indictment without prejudice.

On remand, defendants may not seek to renew a selective-prosecution discovery request and claim with proper evidence.

District Court could reasonably request a word of explanation from the prosecutors.

It is undisputed that the 2020 charges filed against Wilson and Beasley were the first stand-alone prosecutions for arson by the United States Attorney for the Central District of California since 2007 .