Prosecution of Senator Ted Stevens

Senator Ted Stevens was prosecuted and convicted for criminal ethics violations, subsequently lost his re-election campaign, and, only shortly before his tragic passing, was exonerated after a whistleblower revealed that prosecutors withheld critical evidence of the Senator’s innocence in violation of his constitutional rights.

From the start, this prosecution was permeated with government misconduct, making it impossible for the Senator to get a fair trial.  During a pretrial interview, for example, the government’s star witness made statements that would have been strong evidence for the defense to use at trial.  The prosecutors did not, however, give this information to the defense.  Instead, they covered up its existence and eventually procured a new and inconsistent statement from the witness.  Also, during the trial, the prosecutors knowingly introduced false business records and refused to give the defense the grand jury testimony of another witness who had made statements helpful to the Senator, instead representing that the testimony was not “material.”

As a result of numerous egregious violations committed by the experienced prosecutors in this case, the Senator’s conviction was eventually dismissed.  Ordering an investigation into the misconduct, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan explained that “[t]he government’s ill-gotten verdict in the case not only cost that public official his bid for re-election, the results of that election tipped the balance of power in the United States Senate.”  The investigation cannot, however, undo the damage to the Senator’s reputation and legacy, all the more irreparable due to his tragic passing.

This page contains materials related to the prosecution of the late Senator Ted Stevens and the subsequent special counsel investigation into that prosecution.  For information on NACDL's efforts to prevent future discovery violations, visit NACDL's Discovery Reform and Prosecutorial Misconduct pages.

Special Prosecutor Investigation of the Stevens' Prosecution

Interview with Counsel For Senator Ted Stevens (March 16, 2012)

Ted Stevens Prosecutorial Misconduct Report (Released March 15, 2012)

Judge Sullivan’s Order Releasing the Stevens' Report, In re Special Proceedings, Misc. No. 09-0198 (Nov. 21, 2011)

Prosecution of Senator Ted Stevens 

Order Appointing Special Prosecutor, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. April 7, 2009) 

Statement of Attorney General Eric Holder Regarding U.S. v. Theodore F. Stevens (April 1, 2009) 

Continue reading below

Government Motion to Dismiss the Indictment with Prejudice, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. April 1, 2009) 

Defense Reply Motion to Dismiss, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. Feb. 12, 2009) 

Defense Motion to Dismiss, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. Jan. 26, 2009) 

Government Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. Oct. 5, 2008) 

Continue reading below

Featured Products

Defense Motion to Dismiss, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. Oct. 5, 2008) 

Government Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. Oct. 2, 2008) 

Government Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. Sept. 29, 2008) 

Indictment, U.S. v. Stevens, No. 08-231 (D.D.C. July 29, 2008) 

Explore keywords to find information

RECENTLY ADDED & UPCOMING

  1. The Champion
    March/April 2025 Cover

    March/April 2025

    What are the evidentiary implications of field sobriety tests in marijuana cases? Does the odor of marijuana give officers probable cause to search a vehicle?

  2. Amicus Brief
    March/April 2025 Cover

    Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP v. Executive Office of the President

    Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and New York Council of Defense Lawyers as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

  3. News Release

    Nation’s Defense Bar Reiterates Opposition to Actions Against Law Firms – Washington, DC (March 18, 2025)

    The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) remains deeply concerned over recent executive orders targeting law firms, most recently Paul Weiss and Perkins Coie, and repeats its call to uphold the right to counsel and the independence of the legal profession. Despite a ruling blocking the action against Perkins Coie, the administration has continued to target law firms representing disfavored clients and positions, threatening the right to a zealous defense.

  4. Live Event
    2025 Forensic Science & Technology Seminar Cover

    2025 Forensic Science & Technology Seminar

    "Making Sense of Science: Forensic Science, Technology & the Law"

    LOCATION: Sahara Las Vegas Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas, NV
    DATES: April 24-26, 2025

  5. Trials, Technology, and the Fourth Amendment: Case Law Review [Engage & Exchange]

    EXCLUSIVE NACDL MEMBER BENEFIT
    WHEN:
    Tuesday, April 29, 2:00-3:30pm ET / 11:00am-12:30pm PT
    CLE CREDIT: not available
    COST: Free