No New Trial Even Though Cooperating Codefendant was Insane; No Acceptance Where Guilty Plea Entered on Morning of Trial
Unpublished Decisions:
US v. Crabbe, No. 10-1226, 6/2/11 (CO) - Defendant and codefendant Rowan were partners in a business that supplied temporary nurses. Rowan was president and ran things; defendant was vice president. They often didn’t file their quarterly tax returns or remit withheld employee FICA taxes, and wound up getting indicted. Rowan pled guilty and testified against defendant, who was convicted on several counts. Rowan’s attorney questioned his client’s competence to be sentenced. A psychiatrist concluded that Rowan fluctuated between periods of delirium and lucidity, and could not predict whether he would be lucid on any particular day. Rowan died before sentencing. Defendant moved for a new trial based on alleged Brady violation in failing to disclose Rowan’s possible incompetence as a witness or because of newly discovered evidence, and to permit discovery from Rowan’s attorney. The motions were denied and the Tenth affirmed. (1) No Brady violation because the government was not aware of Rowan’s mental condition, and facts that might have put it on notice were not in themselves material. (2) Defendant not entitled to new trial because there was plenty of evidence supporting guilty verdicts apart from Rowan’s testimony, so outcome would likely not have changed had Rowan not testified at all.
US v. Ochoa-Olivas, No. 10-2250, 6/2/11 (NM) - Illegal reentry defendant changed his mind and pled guilty the morning his trial was to begin. The district court refused to award acceptance of responsibility reduction and the Tenth affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion, although it could have granted reduction, so the below guidelines sentence was both procedurally and substantively reasonable.
US v. Crabbe, No. 10-1226, 6/2/11 (CO) - Defendant and codefendant Rowan were partners in a business that supplied temporary nurses. Rowan was president and ran things; defendant was vice president. They often didn’t file their quarterly tax returns or remit withheld employee FICA taxes, and wound up getting indicted. Rowan pled guilty and testified against defendant, who was convicted on several counts. Rowan’s attorney questioned his client’s competence to be sentenced. A psychiatrist concluded that Rowan fluctuated between periods of delirium and lucidity, and could not predict whether he would be lucid on any particular day. Rowan died before sentencing. Defendant moved for a new trial based on alleged Brady violation in failing to disclose Rowan’s possible incompetence as a witness or because of newly discovered evidence, and to permit discovery from Rowan’s attorney. The motions were denied and the Tenth affirmed. (1) No Brady violation because the government was not aware of Rowan’s mental condition, and facts that might have put it on notice were not in themselves material. (2) Defendant not entitled to new trial because there was plenty of evidence supporting guilty verdicts apart from Rowan’s testimony, so outcome would likely not have changed had Rowan not testified at all.
US v. Ochoa-Olivas, No. 10-2250, 6/2/11 (NM) - Illegal reentry defendant changed his mind and pled guilty the morning his trial was to begin. The district court refused to award acceptance of responsibility reduction and the Tenth affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion, although it could have granted reduction, so the below guidelines sentence was both procedurally and substantively reasonable.
posted by Anonymous at 9:31 AM
<< Home