Jurors in Portland, Oregon, acquitted the two Bundy sons of taking over a U.S. wildlife refuge in Oregon for more than a month in early 2016 amid calls for the U.S. government to turn over public land to local control.
In the Nevada case, Navarro faulted federal prosecutors for failing to turn over all evidence to defense attorneys, including records about the conduct of FBI and Bureau of Land Management agents during the standoff.
"The government is obligated to disclose all evidence that might be favorable" to the defense, the judge said.
The case stemmed from an armed confrontation that capped a decadeslong dispute over Cliven Bundy's refusal to pay grazing fees. The 71-year-old rancher says his family has grazed cattle for more than a century in the area and insists public land belongs to states, not the U.S. government.
Related: FBI Agent Charged With Lying About Fatal Oregon Refuge Shooting
Government agents began rounding up his animals. The four on trial were accused of enlisting armed gunmen to force government agents to abandon the effort.
"A mistrial is a very bad result for the government," said Ian Bartrum, a University of Nevada, Las Vegas, law professor who has followed the case closely.
Bartrum had cast the trial as a test of whether U.S. authorities could enforce their own land policy in Western states where the government owns or controls vast expanses.
"It looks even worse because it isn't the sort of jury nullification we've seen before, but actual incompetence (or worse) by the prosecution," Bartrum said in an email. "It certainly erodes a lot of confidence in the federal government's motives."
Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre had no immediate answer about whether prosecutors would retry the case. If so, the Bundys and Payne still would face 15 felony charges including assault and threats against federal officers, firearms counts, obstruction and extortion.
In the Nevada case, Navarro faulted federal prosecutors for failing to turn over all evidence to defense attorneys, including records about the conduct of FBI and Bureau of Land Management agents during the standoff.
"The government is obligated to disclose all evidence that might be favorable" to the defense, the judge said.
The case stemmed from an armed confrontation that capped a decadeslong dispute over Cliven Bundy's refusal to pay grazing fees. The 71-year-old rancher says his family has grazed cattle for more than a century in the area and insists public land belongs to states, not the U.S. government.
Related: FBI Agent Charged With Lying About Fatal Oregon Refuge Shooting
Government agents began rounding up his animals. The four on trial were accused of enlisting armed gunmen to force government agents to abandon the effort.
"A mistrial is a very bad result for the government," said Ian Bartrum, a University of Nevada, Las Vegas, law professor who has followed the case closely.
Bartrum had cast the trial as a test of whether U.S. authorities could enforce their own land policy in Western states where the government owns or controls vast expanses.
"It looks even worse because it isn't the sort of jury nullification we've seen before, but actual incompetence (or worse) by the prosecution," Bartrum said in an email. "It certainly erodes a lot of confidence in the federal government's motives."
Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre had no immediate answer about whether prosecutors would retry the case. If so, the Bundys and Payne still would face 15 felony charges including assault and threats against federal officers, firearms counts, obstruction and extortion.
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
