Did the Fifth Circuit err in reinstating the indictment despite the district court's finding that the prosecutor's misconduct destroyed the integrity of the prosecution?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Prior to trial in this federal prosecution for alleged adoption fraud, the district court dismissed the indictment with prejudice based on its finding that “the integrity of this prosecution has been destroyed” and its findings that the prosecutor: (1) had failed to disclose exculpatory and impeaching police reports and related documents in her file for years; (2) had failed to do her job and to supervise the case agent and investigation and did not know what she was doing; (3) was unaware of what evidence was in the government’s possession because of her purposefully selective choice to review only a portion of the evidence based on her theory of the case; (4) had repeatedly misrepresented that all discovery had been turned over to the defense, which showed that she was not credible and could not be trusted to tell the truth; (5) had turned over supplemental records only when the defense had found out what the government had, causing repeated delay; and (6) despite the obligation to investigate the case completely, had relied on the government’s witnesses to filter their own documents and select what they as interested party laymen considered to be relevant. Without showing any deference to the district court’s findings or view of the evidence, the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of the indictment. The questions presented are: 1. Did the Fifth Circuit enter a decision in conflict with Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 638 n.9 (1993), by reviewing the district court’s order dismissing the indictment with prejudice for a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and for prejudice instead of reviewing the district court’s order for structural error, where the district court’s dismissal was based on its finding that “the integrity of this ; prosecution has been destroyed” by the government’s pattern of misconduct? 2. Did the Fifth Circuit enter a decision in conflict with Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935), Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and United States v. Hastings, 461 U.S. 499, 505 (1983), by reinstating the indictment where the district court found that the integrity of the prosecution had been destroyed by the government’s failure to produce exculpatory evidence, its false statements to the court, and its misconduct that allowed private parties to selectively pick and choose the evidence to be used by the prosecution, which resulted in the permanent loss of other evidence? 1 3. Did the Fifth Circuit enter a decision in conflict with Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 (1985), by failing to show deference to the district court’s findings of fact and credibility determinations and by ignoring the evidence supporting them when it reinstated the indictment based on its own global determination of the facts? ii