Whether absolute immunity extends to a prosecutor's knowing destruction of exculpatory evidence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Nickie Miller was wrongly incarcerated for two years for a murder he did not commit. The charges were based on a coerced confession from a woman who later wrote multiple letters admitting that her confession was false. The trial court ordered these exculpatory letters turned over to Miller’s defense team. But the lead prosecutor, Respondent Keith Craycraft, instead instructed the woman to destroy them. The charges were eventually dropped before trial. Miller then sued Respondent for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In a split decision, the Sixth Circuit held that Respondent was entitled to dismissal on absolute immunity grounds. The questions presented, each of which is the subject of a circuit conflict, are: 1. Is absolute immunity unavailable under § 1983 where a prosecutor knowingly destroys exculpatory evidence? 2. Is absolute immunity unavailable under § 1983 where a prosecutor defies a court order that compels specific action, leaving no room for the exercise of discretion?