A man convicted of several crimes after an April 2007 incident involving himself and three Washington, D.C., police officers had his conviction overturned by an appeals court. In the original trial, he was found guilty of possessing a firearm during a crime of violence and aggravated assault while armed.

During the altercation, which occurred on April 3, 2007, the suspect was approached by three patrol officers. The man was carrying a cup that the officers believed to contain alcohol, which would be a violation of the law. The man ran from the officers and officers claimed the man seemed to be carrying a weapon. In the end, the man and an officer were shot, perhaps by the same bullet.

In the original trial, the defense was not fully allowed to cross-examine the officer who had written the questionable police report. This was the same officer who was shot. Due to this, a three-judge appeals panel reversed the man's convictions.

A Glock 22 was found at the scene with an expended cartridge. The three officers were allegedly carrying department-issued Glock 9 millimeter pistols, which ballistics reports indicated had not been fired.

According to the defense, testimony and a report from one of the officers regarding the incident were not clear. Some believed that the report was copied from another report, which brought the credibility of the officer and the report into question.

This is why the appeals process exists: to protect citizens who have been taken advantage of by shoddy law enforcement work. Police have to follow the proper procedure when arresting someone, and that includes filing the proper paperwork.

Source: Associated Press, "Appeals court reverses convictions in man's 2007 armed scuffle with DC police officer," Eric Tucker, Feb. 3, 2012