Editing Killing of Chandra Levy (section)

=== Disciplinary proceedings against prosecutors ===
Defense lawyers for Guandique believed that Campoamor-Sánchez and Haines had deliberately failed to turn over the first page of the Morales memo. They filed a complaint to that effect with the Justice Department's [[Office of Professional Responsibility]] (OPR). After investigating for two years, OPR found no ethical or legal violations.<ref name="Reuters prosecutors story">{{cite news|last=Scarcella|first=Mike|title=Prosecutors in Chandra Levy case fight six-month sanction bid by ethics enforcers|url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/prosecutors-chandra-levy-case-fight-six-month-sanction-bid-by-ethics-enforcers-2021-11-09/|newspaper=[[Reuters]]|date=November 9, 2021|access-date=January 20, 2022|archive-date=January 21, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220121001048/https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/prosecutors-chandra-levy-case-fight-six-month-sanction-bid-by-ethics-enforcers-2021-11-09/|url-status=live}}</ref>

Campoamor-Sánchez left the Justice Department to work at the [[Securities and Exchange Commission]], and Haines retired. In 2020 the [[District of Columbia Bar]]'s Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) announced it would investigate the allegations; it brought charges the following May.<ref name="National Law Journal article">{{cite news|last=Scarcella|first=Mike|title=Two Former Federal Prosecutors Contest Ethics Charges Stemming From Chandra Levy Murder Trial|url=https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2021/05/04/2-former-federal-prosecutors-contest-ethics-charges-stemming-from-chandra-levy-murder-trial/|newspaper=[[National Law Journal]]|date=May 4, 2021|access-date=January 20, 2022|archive-date=January 21, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220121001050/https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2021/05/04/2-former-federal-prosecutors-contest-ethics-charges-stemming-from-chandra-levy-murder-trial/|url-status=live}}</ref>

At the hearing both attorneys testified in their behalf. Haines believed that the full memo had been turned over to the defense and they had lost the first page. She did not think there would have been any reason for prosecutors to withhold it as it did not seriously damage their case; but she sometimes delayed turning over more specific information on witnesses to the defense since at some trials that had led to those witnesses getting killed. Both she and Campoamor-Sánchez testified that they had clashed over what to turn over to the defense and when, since at the time there were no clear rules in the Justice Department about it, leading to greater clashes between the two about who would question Morales at trial and handle the case's [[closing argument]]—Campoamor-Sánchez had originally been scheduled to do both, but Haines reassigned those tasks to herself, leaving him feeling marginalized.<ref name="2021 WashPost disciplinary hearing story" />

Three months later ODC announced its preliminary conclusion that the two had violated bar rules requiring that prosecutors disclose potentially exculpatory evidence to defense lawyers, and recommended both be [[Suspension (punishment)|suspended]] from practicing law for six months. Both contested that punishment, with Haines's attorney calling it "unhinged—from both reality and from any precedent in law or logic". She and Campoamor-Sánchez have denied any wrongdoing.<ref name="Reuters prosecutors story" />