Seventh Circuit: John Mandacina v. Frederick Entzel

 

The tendency of undisclosed potential impeachment evidence to come into view years afterward isn't a structural flaw in statutory Habeas sufficient to justify an application under the traditional form; the statutory form clock restarts from the discovery of the evidence, and second or successive petitions merely limit the petitioner to a single claim.

Although there is not a one-year limit on the older statutory form of Habeas, in such a case, equitable principles restrict abuse of the Writ.

John Mandacina v.  Frederick Entzel

Eighth Circuit: United States v. Jack Chappell

 

Evidence of witness' subsequent admission that she was under the influence of narcotics while testifying that she was not a drug user is not new evidence sufficient to revisit the conviction, since the disclosures do not rise to the level of addressing basic competency to testify, and would at most be in for impeachment.

Government concealment of witness' mental state would not rise to the level of a Brady claim.

No abuse of discretion in refusal to grant downward variance from sentencing guidelines.

Concur in J:

The disclosures about the witness are new evidence, but aren't material.

United States  v.  Jack Chappell

Ninth Circuit: USA v. Maher Obagi

Where a separate immunity deal involving a chief government witness is discovered halfway through defense closings, the genie is out of the bottle, as the govt has already crafted an approach that uses that testimony to decide the case, even where it only bolsters other witness' accounts.

Dissent: Shouldn't be a per se rule to grant Brady claims that arise after closings -- the testimony was duplicative, gov't evidence was overwhelming, and the curative instruction was strong.

USA v. Maher Obagi

Sixth Circuit: Ralph Carusone v. Warden

Lack of disclosure of medical report plainly discrediting the primary theory of the offense resulted a reasonable probability of a different outcome under Brady, as the second theory of the offense used by the District Court to deny the Writ was not endorsed in full by any expert at trial.

Ralph Carusone v. Warden

Fifth Circuit: George Alvarez v. City of Brownsville

Insufficient connection between municipality's policies and the withholding of the evidence in this case; placing sole discretion in a single officer does not amount to deliberate indifference, and the officer's conduct was no worse than negligent.

Deft did not have a constitutional right to pre-plea-deal disclosure of exculpatory evidence in the possession of the government.  

Concurrence: Federal District Court had obligation to allow challenges to potentially doctored pieces of evidence.

Concurrence: Brady is a trial right, waiveable at plea stage.

Dissent: Constitutional right.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/16/16-40772-CR2.pdf

Second Circuit: United States v. Alston

Off-duty police officer who carries a weapon at the direction of the police force can still be charged for possessing a weapon in furtherance of the illegal acts, as weapons can be possessed for multiple reasons.

No error in denial of new trial based on the fact that one of the witnesses mis-stated their employment status.

Post-verdict jailhouse infractions of witness do not give rise to a Brady claim.

No error in denial of minor participant sentencing reduction, as the deft's interference with law enforcement allowed criminal conspiracy to proceed; similar logic for obstruction and breach of trust sentencing enhancements.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/ef543637-0188-4de4-a0a9-d7b548d25e63/1/doc/17-2405_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/ef543637-0188-4de4-a0a9-d7b548d25e63/1/hilite/

Fourth Circuit: US v. Chavez

No Brady violation in nondisclosure of prosecution witness immigration records, as not prejudicial, and the favorable immigration treatment was sufficiently raised during trial to discredit the testimony.

No Napue violation, as gov't didn't know of the misstatement in advance, and it was corrected on cross.

Scattered prosecutorial misconduct incidental.

No error on not instructing on the lesser included crimes, as a murder was committed, and the defts didn't have to actually physically participate in the murder to be found guilty of it.

Admission of evidence on uncharged murder not dispositive, and arguendo, harmless error.

Claiming lack of foreknowledge not enough to justify severance as an antagonistic defense.

Statute requiring second chair counsel in capital cases requires prompt request for replacement by the deft; court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance and continuance.

Sufficient evidence.

Historical cell site information admitted under the good faith exception.

No Eighth Amendment violation in life sentence for crime committed at 18 without specific findings from jury.

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/164499.P.pdf

DC Circuit: USA v. Gregory Sitzmann

Consideration of extraterritorial conduct did not violate the presumption against extraterritoriality, given the domestic elements of the conspiracy.

Assuming manufactured venue is a thing, agents' instructions to wire funds to DC was not an impermissible creation of venue.

As venue was not objected to prior to the close of the prosecutions case in chief, no error in court's holding that it was not an issue for the finder of fact.

No Brady claim in late release of co-conspirator's grand jury testimony, as insufficiently exculpatory.

Purportedly false evidence presented insufficiently prejudicial.

Introduction of co-conspirator's guilty plea not plain error, as insufficiently prejudicial.

No ineffective assistance.

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/38541443F92BCBB4852582BB00514136/$file/15-3074.pdf

First Circuit: US v. Calderon

Brady, Grand Juries


Undisclosed evidence was not dispositive -- court below did not impose a sufficiency of the evidence test in in asking whether the suppressed evidence was dispositive of the verdict.

Knowledge of plea deal in second jurisdiction cannot be imputed to the prosecution in the first jurisdiction as the basis for a Brady claim.

Absent grave prosecutorial misconduct, guilty verdict at trial means that there was sufficient probable cause for the indictment.


US v. Calderon

Second Circuit: Fuentes v. Griffin

Brady, Habeas, AEDPA


Habeas granted, as psychiatric records of critical witness offered substantial impeachment value.

Dissent: Materiality is intrinsically subjective.


Fuentes v. Griffin

Sixth Circuit: USA v. George Rafidi

Predicates, Brady, FRCrimP, Sentencing


Given the requirement of use of force, the crime at issue is categorically a violent crime predicate conviction.

Gov't fulfilled Brady obligations with computer modeling information by enclosing a CD of the scan in discovery -- there was no affirmative duty on the gov't to do crime-scene computer modeling.

No plain error in sleeping juror cure.

Sentence not grossly disproportionate.



USA v. George Rafidi

Eighth Circuit: Dale Helmig v. Carl Fowler

Brady, S1983


Sheriff's lack of disclosure of multiple calls from victim discussing safety concerns in the context of a divorce didn't rise to the level of intention and bad faith required for civil damages under S1983.



Dale Helmig  v.  Carl Fowler

DC Circuit: USA v. Juan Vega

Crim

Stream of commerce suffices for circumstantial evidence that deft intended cocaine to reach US.

Sufficient instruction on mens rea.

Urging in closing that jury serve as community conscience and use of first person singular was harmless error, given strength of case.

 False testimony not later corrected by govt was not dispositive.

Not issuing missing evidence instruction on lack of govt records on out of court photo lineups was harmless error.

No Brady violation on late-disclosed photo with attribution problems.

No error in refusal to admit notes frm quesitoning as prior inconsistent statement.

Error in manager/supervisor sentencing bump, as no showing that employees knew they were doing something illegal.

No error in admission of mistaken identification, given curative instruction.

Deft claim that Title III has no extraterritorial application, even if true, would not preclude extraterritorial wiretapping.

No error in denial of cross on why cooperating witnesses were wearing electronic monitoring devices.

Drug making video not overly prejudicial.



USA v. Juan Vega

Seventh Circuit: USA v. Julius Lawson

Crim, Brady

Single witness' testimony sufficient evidence for conviction for use of a firearm.

Jury instruction holding that deft could know of weapon either before or during the crime (proper: before) held harmless error.

Brady error in withholding of police misconduct file not material, as the officer in question provided merely forensic evidence.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2016/D01-19/C:14-3276:J:Kanne:aut:T:fnOp:N:1688989:S:0

Eighth Circuit: United States v. Randall Robinson

Brady, FRE

Brady material no sufficiently dispositive to be material.

No error in admission of previous conviction.

Where there are multiple superseding indictments, a count dropped from an earlier indictment can be tried later where the superseding indictment is based on a new set of facts.

No abuse of discretion in declining to recuse where an attorney who formerly represented the deft is hired by the judge as a clerk.

Sufficient evidence for false statements count.

Standard of review for vindictive prosc is de novo on law, clear error for facts.

Jury deadlocked, so no vindictive prosc.

Dissent - Brady impeachment evidence was material; error to include subsequent letter in record re: the recusal.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/16/01/143503P.pdf