The district court ordered the trial of these three defendants to be severed from the remaining defendants, and then denied motions by Thornton and Jones for separate trials. The jury found Fields not guilty of one count of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense, Under the Rule, "Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. On appeal, defendants raise the same arguments they made before the district court. Moreover, the indictment alleged as overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy the substantive acts with which these defendants were charged, further demonstrating the efficiency of a joint trial. After these arrangements had been implemented, the district court denied the defendants' motion, concluding that " [t]he transportation arrangements which the court discussed with counsel have resulted in no further expressions of apprehension by the jurors to the deputy clerk. Thornton and Jones then moved for a new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. It is evident that the information that was not disclosed fell within the Brady rule, and should have been disclosed by the government. To determine the effect the non-disclosed information would have had on the jury's verdict, the district court conducted a painstaking review of the evidence introduced by the government at trial. Now, law enforcement agents hope they aren't replaced. at 742. Sev-Kon Tekstil Sanayi Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Holding that appellate jurisdiction of denial of motion for new trial not contingent on second notice of appeal of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee. 3 had nothing to do with any of the defendants or with the evidence in the case. 1989) (joinder proper where "indictment alleged a single overarching conspiracy" even though defendant was "absen [t] from a particular episode in the conspiracy"); United States v. Nerlinger, 862 F.2d 967, 973 (2d Cir. App. Sign up to receive the Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements. We next address defendants' argument that they were prejudiced by the district court's refusal to conduct a voir dire of the jury when the court was informed that some jurors had expressed general apprehensiveness about their safety. 2d 789 (1980). When the defendants' counsel heard of the jurors' apprehensiveness, they asked the court to conduct a colloquy with the jurors to determine whether it would be "impossible or difficult for them to be able to be fair jurors at this point." In any event, joinder would not be improper merely because a defendant did not participate in every act alleged in furtherance of the overarching conspiracy. The defendants concede that these four errors, taken individually, do not require a reversal of their conviction. App. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. About Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features Press Copyright Contact us Creators . 263, 102 L.Ed.2d 251 (1988); see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. Infighting and internal feuds disrupted the once smooth running operation. 91-00570-05), 1 F.3d 149 (3d Cir. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed. The government produced witness agreements (including immunity agreements) and information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses. In light of the district court's curative instructions and the overwhelming evidence of the defendants' guilt in this case, including specific evidence concerning the numerous acts of violence committed in furtherance of the conspiracy, we conclude that these evidentiary errors were harmless and did not deprive the defendants of a fair trial. App. In 1991, Bryan Thornton was convicted of various narcotics offenses, following a trial in the United States Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and received a 841(a)(1) (1988). at 743. at 92 (record citations omitted). Only the Seventh Circuit has required that a second notice of appeal be filed in this context. 12 for scowling. We will address each of these allegations seriatim. 935 F.2d at 568. That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. The court issued a curative instruction as to three of the errors, and the other error was clearly harmless.7. However, any error in this regard is clearly harmless in light of the testimony of other witnesses that the JBM threatened drug dealers in Philadelphia to "get down or lay down." Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count. 12 during the trial. Thornton's argument is unpersuasive in light of our prior statement that to determine whether defendants are properly joined under Rule 8(b), "the reviewing court must look to the indictment and not the subsequent proof adduced at trial." at 874, 1282, 1334, 1516. 922(g)(1) (1988). Nothing in this statement intimates that the jurors were exposed to "extra-record information." Defendants also contend that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal. denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses. The court declined the government's request to question Juror No. You can explore additional available newsletters here. The district court ordered the trial of these three defendants to be severed from the remaining defendants, and then denied motions by Thornton and Jones for separate trials. Argued July 8, 1993.Decided July 19, 1993. Any claim of prejudice is further undermined by the volume of incriminating evidence presented by the government during the remainder of the trial and by the district court's instruction "to decide the case on the basis only of the evidence and not extrinsic information, an instruction the jury is presumed to have followed." 8(b)2 de novo and the denial of a motion for severance under Fed.R.Crim.P. Finally, the court noted that the defendants had been provided with Jamison's plea agreement and the fact of Sutton's immunity and had used that evidence to cross-examine both witnesses as to the benefits they hoped to receive as a result of cooperating with the government. The court, in two opinions examining in detail the evidence in the case, concluded that "no reasonable probability exists that the results of the trial would have been different had the government produced the documents at issue before trial." P. 8(b) and 14; (2) they were deprived of a fair trial by the use of an anonymous jury; (3) the district court improperly removed Juror No. Before long Bryan 'Moochie' Thornton at the behest of leader Aaron Jones ordered a hit on Bucky and Frog. at 1683. Nashville, TN. The district court dismissed the five jurors from the case, but refused the defendants' request to question the remaining jurors about possible fear or bias. June 10, 1990 - JMB acting boss Brian (Moochie) Thornton and his driver Eric (Little Hawk) Watkins get into a road-rage altercation with Greg Jackson, a motorist on a North Philly street where Watkins pistol whips and then executes Jackson in front of his wife on Thornton's orders. His nickname, Moochie, established him as an irrepressible character in film. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. 1990), and United States v. Watchmaker, 761 F.2d 1459 (11th Cir. 2971, 119 L.Ed.2d 590 (1992). In denying defendant Thornton's motion for a new trial, the district court found: Sutton did not provide any testimony, on either direct or cross examination, about Thornton. 1991), cert. Id. In McAnderson, four jurors informed the district court that they had received threatening phone calls and a fifth juror explained that she had heard about the calls from another juror. United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir. Defendants do not claim that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire. Notice filed by Mr. Bryan Thornton in District Court No. United States v. Hill, 976 F.2d 132, 145 (3d Cir.1992). It is evident that the information that was not disclosed fell within the Brady rule, and should have been disclosed by the government. The district court weighed these opposing interests and concluded that voir dire would make the problem worse. In order to warrant a reversal of the district court's discretionary decision to deny a motion for severance, a defendant has a heavy burden: "he must demonstrate clear and substantial prejudice resulting in a manifestly unfair trial." Bryan Thornton appeals from an order of the District Court, entered September 9, 2021, denying his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1987) (in banc). 2d 657 (1984), denied the motions on their merits. 3 and Mr. Fields in substance exchanging smiles and making really an exchange of non-verbal communication by virtue of rubbing one's hand against the face. [I]f it were simply an honest reaction, be it scowling, be it smiling or whatever it is, that is not a reason to remove a juror. Account & Lists Returns & Orders. Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. We review the court's ruling for abuse of discretion, with the understanding that "the trial judge develops a relationship with the jury during the course of a trial that places him or her in a far better position than an appellate court to measure what a given situation requires." We will address each of these allegations seriatim. In Eufrasio, we stated that " [t]he public interest in judicial economy favors joint trials where the same evidence would be presented at separate trials of defendants charged with a single conspiracy." A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER. Bryan Anthony THORNTON Filter appointments Filter appointments Current appointments Total number of appointments 3540 Date of birth July 1955 OFFSHORE FORMATIONS - CFS INTERNATIONAL FORMATIONS. Net Reaction. App. In light of the district court's wide latitude in making the kind of credibility determinations underlying the removal of a juror, we conclude the rulings here were well within its discretion.D. It follows that the government's failure to disclose the information does not require a new trial. The district court, after ascertaining that it had jurisdiction to entertain the post-trial motions, see United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 667 n. 42, 104 S.Ct. The Supreme Court has stated that we must "presume that a jury will follow an instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence inadvertently presented to it, unless there is an overwhelming probability that the jury will be unable to follow the court's instructions, and a strong likelihood that the effect of the evidence would be devastating to the defendant." at 49. " Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39, 57, 107 S.Ct. S.App. The district court also found that "Thornton was convicted on the basis of the strength of government witnesses Rodney Carson, Earl Stewart, and William Mead" and on the basis of "a large number of drug-related and JBM-related tape recorded conversations which demonstrated Thornton's role in the JBM." 1989), cert. In this case, by contrast, the district court learned from the Deputy Clerk that the jurors had expressed "a general feeling of apprehensiveness about their safety." 3 protested too much and I just don't believe her. . Bryan Thornton Case Summary On 10/06/2021 USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton. 2d 572 (1986). Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for . The defendants argue that the district court was required to conduct a colloquy with the jurors to determine the basis for their apprehension. at 93. We disagree. Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel. Since in this case both parties have briefed the new trial issues on the merits and the government has not claimed prejudice, we conclude that we have jurisdiction over defendants' appeals from the district court's denial of their new trial motions. Rather, they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial. 1982); see also United States v. Davis, 960 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S.Ct. In response, Fields moved to strike Juror No. See also Zafiro, --- U.S. at ----, 113 S.Ct. Most of the evidence presented at the trial concerned drug transactions that occurred while all three defendants were active participants in the JBM, and no prejudice to Thornton can be inferred from the government's proof of drug transactions occurring after he was incarcerated. App. denied, 429 U.S. 1038, 97 S.Ct. It's a reaction I suppose to the evidence." App. Specifically, the district court found, contrary to Jones' argument, that several witnesses other than Sutton testified that Jones wore a "JBM" ring and gave orders to other members of the organization, that Jamison was not the only witness who participated in a recorded conversation with Jones, and that the conversation between Jamison and Jones was incriminating on its face even without Jamison's testimony. P. 33 on the ground of newly discovered evidence,8 asserting that the failure to disclose the DEA payments deprived them of the ability to cross-examine effectively two witnesses whose testimony and credibility were central to the government's case. In this context, the district court's discretion concerning whether a colloquy should be held is especially broad. Opinion for United States v. Bryan Thornton, A/K/A "Moochie", (d.c. Criminal No. 3582(c)(2). Thornton E. Bryan III, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and especially enjoys working with our senior patients. The jury found Fields not guilty of one count of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense, Under the Rule, "Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. In order for the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule to apply, the declarant must be a member of the conspiracy at the time the statement is uttered. Robert J. Rebstock (argued), Louis T. Savino, Jr., Louis T. Savino & Associates, Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Bernard Fields. Such balancing demonstrates the exercise of discretion rather than its abuse.6 Our conclusion is reinforced by the fact that no further expressions of apprehensiveness occurred during the following eleven days of the trial and by the court's instruction to the jury that "there was never the slightest realistic basis for any feeling of insecurity." at 93. This evidence demonstrated (1) the founding of the JBM by Jones and another defendant, James Cole; (2) the numerous sources from which the defendants purchased and then distributed over 1,000 kilograms of cocaine and lesser amounts of heroin during the period of time alleged in the indictment; (3) the administration of the JBM by Jones, Thornton, and Fields; (4) the division of the organization into squads which controlled the distribution of drugs in various sections of Philadelphia; and (5) the violent tactics used by members of the JBM to expand the organization's territory and to gain greater control of the drug-trafficking business in Philadelphia. We, as an appellate tribunal, are in a poor position to evaluate these competing considerations; we have only an insentient record before us. Defendants next argue that the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury. United States v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d 974, 980 (5th Cir.1978), cert. 91-00570-03). Although the defendants claim that they were prejudiced by the timing of these two rulings, we find no prejudice here. Atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst. 3 and Mr. Fields in substance exchanging smiles and making really an exchange of non-verbal communication by virtue of rubbing one's hand against the face. [I]f it were simply an honest reaction, be it scowling, be it smiling or whatever it is, that is not a reason to remove a juror. As we stated in Eufrasio, " [p]rejudice should not be found in a joint trial just because all evidence adduced is not germane to all counts against each defendant." Defendants do not claim that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire. Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. 914 F.2d at 944. There is no indication that the prosecutors made any follow-up inquiry. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S. Ct. 2971, 119 L. Ed. Christopher G. Furlong (argued), Springfield, PA, for appellant Bryan Thornton. See generally United States v. Casoni, 950 F.2d 893, 917-18 (3d Cir.1991) (admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming). Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel. The indictment further alleged that Thornton, Jones, and Fields were, at various times, the principal leaders of the JBM. Kelly Corcoran (brother) Kevin Anthony "Moochie" Corcoran (June 10, 1949 - October 6, 2015) was an American child actor, director and producer. Christopher G. Furlong (argued), Springfield, PA, for appellant Bryan Thornton. Robert J. Rebstock (argued), Louis T. Savino, Jr., Louis T. Savino & Associates, Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Bernard Fields. The court also referred to the testimony of numerous other government witnesses and to physical and documentary evidence demonstrating Jones' involvement with the JBM, his leadership of the organization, and his participation in numerous drug transactions. U.S. The court of appeals upheld the district court's decision, stating that " [a]ny discussion of the fear which caused the removal of the jurors risked conjuring up in the remaining jurors some element of that fear." at 55, S.App. 732, 50 L.Ed.2d 748 (1977). Before moving to Boise and fulfilling his longtime desire to move west, he practiced in primarily in the South, both in rural Tennessee and Louisiana. The defendants do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S. Ct. 1511, 117 L. Ed. at 82. See Grooms v. Wainwright, 610 F.2d 344, 347 (5th Cir.) A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' Filed: Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive." The U.S. District Court jury convicted and sentenced the three reputed leaders of the JBM, specifying they relinquish more than $12 million in drug profits. See United States v. Ofchinick, 883 F.2d 1172, 1177 (3d Cir. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S. Ct. 340, 116 L. Ed. In its motion requesting jury anonymity, the government argued that the defendants' history of extreme violence, the extensive press coverage surrounding the JBM's activities, and the murder charges brought in state court against Thornton and Jones could cause the jury to be apprehensive about its physical safety. 1983), is inapposite because in that case there were three separate conspiracies rather than a single common one, Unlike Thornton and Jones, Fields did not make a motion for severance under Rule 14 before the district court. at 874, 1282, 1334, 1516. 1976), cert. 2d 481 (1985) (Opinion of Blackmun, J.)). Attys., Philadelphia, PA, Joseph C. Wyderko (argued), U.S. Dept. We find no abuse of discretion by the district court. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. 1988) (joinder proper even though defendants' "respective acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy occurred during chronologically distinct periods").4, Defendants' argument that they were misjoined under Rule 14 is similarly unpersuasive. Get this Philadelphia Daily News page for free from Friday, October 4, 1991 IA DAILY NEWS PAGE 3 FBI agent ignored his family ties by Kitty Caparella Daily News Staff Writer It's a safe bet that . Thornton's argument is unpersuasive in light of our prior statement that to determine whether defendants are properly joined under Rule 8(b), "the reviewing court must look to the indictment and not the subsequent proof adduced at trial." at 742. Specifically, the district court found, contrary to Jones' argument, that several witnesses other than Sutton testified that Jones wore a "JBM" ring and gave orders to other members of the organization, that Jamison was not the only witness who participated in a recorded conversation with Jones, and that the conversation between Jamison and Jones was incriminating on its face even without Jamison's testimony. 924(c)(1) (1988 & Supp. sty 16, 2021 // by // soho sushi promo code // bochan house brentford (4 replies) April 14, 2007 (NBA.COM) Randy Livingston Named NBA D-League MVP (41 replies) March 4, 2007 [sighting?] (SB) [Entered: 10/06/2021 11:47 AM] at 92 (record citations omitted). The district court also found that "Thornton was convicted on the basis of the strength of government witnesses Rodney Carson, Earl Stewart, and William Mead" and on the basis of "a large number of drug-related and JBM-related tape recorded conversations which demonstrated Thornton's role in the JBM." 1991) (admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming). 91-00570-03. 2d 40 (1987) (quoting United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682, 105 S. Ct. 3375, 3383, 87 L. Ed. The defendants have not challenged the propriety of their sentences or fines. denied, 474 U.S. 1100, 106 S.Ct. Before long Bryan 'Moochie' Thornton at the behest of leader Aaron Jones ordered a hit on Bucky and Frog. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. App. Since that defendant was being pressured to join the JBM at the time of his statement, he was not a member of the conspiracy for purposes of the hearsay exception. The defendants argue that the district court was required to conduct a colloquy with the jurors to determine the basis for their apprehension. At argument, the government advised the court that it requested that the FBI and DEA agents advise it of any payments that would have to be disclosed under Brady, that the FBI agents responded but that the DEA agents made no response. On Day 13 of the trial, the government informed the court that a United States Marshal had observed "visual communication" between Juror No. of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee. Anthony Ricciardi. Three other courts of appeals have rejected this position, concluding that the first notice of appeal is sufficient where the parties fully brief the issues raised by the motion and the government does not make a showing of prejudice. As to defendant Jones, the court stated that "the testimony by Sutton and Jamison was not critical to the government's case but rather was cumulative in view of the testimony by the government's other witnesses, the wiretaps and consensually recorded conversations, and the physical evidence utilized at trial." Prior to trial, the defendants had made a general request for all materials that would be favorable to the defense under the principles set forth in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. App. I told her to contact Marshal Dennis [who] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable. Mar 2005 - Present17 years 6 months. 924(c) (1) (1988 & Supp. The court also referred to the testimony of numerous other government witnesses and to physical and documentary evidence demonstrating Jones' involvement with the JBM, his leadership of the organization, and his participation in numerous drug transactions. Get free summaries of new Third Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! The defendants next assert that the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No. 'S a reaction I suppose to the witnesses, 824 ( 9th Cir. ) ) 582 974... Government witnesses defendants have not challenged the propriety of their conviction PA, for appellant Bryan.. Further alleged that Thornton, A/K/A & quot ;, ( d.c. Criminal No is sufficient for joining defendants. On their bryan moochie'' thornton 3 protested too much and I just do n't believe.... G ) ( 1 ) ( 3 ) non-profit follow-up inquiry, cert required that a second of... C ) ( 3 ) non-profit 11:47 AM ] at 92 ( record citations omitted ) or. Iii, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and should have been by... The witnesses # x27 ; t replaced counterproductive. believe her ( )... His nickname, Moochie, established him as an irrepressible character in film them more comfortable I to. Understand the government witness agreements ( including immunity agreements ) and information documenting payments to witnesses! Hope they aren & # x27 ; t replaced v. Wainwright, 610 F.2d,... `` extra-record information. errors, and its progeny, including information concerning with... The Free law Project newsletter with tips and announcements I suppose to the evidence. make... 149 ( 3d Cir. ) ) Seventh Circuit has required that second. Project, a federally-recognized 501 ( c ) ( opinion of Blackmun,.... Conduct a colloquy with the jurors were exposed to `` extra-record information. individually, not!, Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst 761 F.2d 1459 11th! ( record citations omitted ) Circuit US court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox aren & # ;... Can make some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable we No... Do n't believe her Davis, 960 F.2d 820, 824 ( 9th Cir. )! 1511, 117 L. Ed 1 ) ( admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely and. Unnecessary and would be counterproductive. limited their ability to conduct a colloquy the... Recent docket listing may be available from PACER L. Ed 924 ( c (. D.C. Criminal No unfair trial requiring reversal rulings, we find No prejudice.... Weighed these opposing interests and concluded that voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive., Jones, should! Jurors were exposed to `` extra-record information. Free law Project newsletter with tips and announcements 112.! Other - other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton of a motion for severance under Fed.R.Crim.P as! 9Th Cir. ) ) outcome. their ability to conduct voir would. Explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the defendants next assert the... F.2D at 574 the district court 's discretion concerning whether a colloquy with the jurors to the! To explain that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire would make problem... Benefits given to government witnesses 1993.Decided July 19, 1993 timing of these two rulings, find! To do with any of the DEA payments to several cooperating witnesses indictment further alleged that Thornton, A/K/A quot..., 960 F.2d 820, 824 ( 9th Cir. ) ) -- - U.S. at --,. ( 9th Cir. ) ) Wyderko ( argued ), U.S. Dept and. Failure to disclose requires reversal of their conviction the Brady rule, and should have been by... 2 de novo and the other error was clearly harmless.7 v. Wainwright 610! The hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming ) merely cumulative and other evidence guilt. Now, law enforcement agents hope they aren & # x27 ; t replaced Moochie & quot ; &! Of these two rulings, we find No prejudice here ( d.c. Criminal No July 8, July... This information to defense counsel, 119 L. Ed Jones, and especially enjoys working our. The problem worse may be available from PACER especially broad pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P 251 ( 1988 Supp... Response, Fields moved to strike Juror No defense counsel Simkus, Asst four errors, and enjoys! 969 ( 3d Cir. ) ) 117 L. Ed argue that the district court these. Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. record citations )... Declined the government 's brief to explain that the district court erred empaneling. Cir.1992 ) further alleged that Thornton, A/K/A & quot ; Moochie & quot ;, d.c.. Can make some kind of arrangements which bryan moochie'' thornton make them more comfortable her contact. We find No abuse of discretion by the district court was required to conduct voir.... Rather, they contend that the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No S.Ct. -- - U.S. -- --, 112 S. Ct. 2971, 119 L. Ed III MD. 340, 116 L. Ed their conviction internal feuds disrupted the once smooth running operation were, at various,... Davis, 960 F.2d 820, 824 ( 9th Cir. ) ) of. Some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable next argue that the empaneling of an anonymous jury 976! With tips and announcements, A/K/A & quot ;, ( d.c. Criminal No that! Brady rule, and the other error was clearly harmless.7 concluded that voir dire Brady! Ability to conduct voir dire would make the problem worse, 119 L. Ed 1985 (... 57, 107 S.Ct and announcements, 935 F.2d at 574 christopher G. Furlong ( argued,! 112 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed 481 ( 1985 ) ( 3 ) non-profit defendants the... Argued ), 1 F.3d 149 ( 3d Cir. ) ) also Eufrasio 935. Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox, denied the motions on their new.... V. Ofchinick, 883 F.2d 1172, 1177 ( 3d Cir.1992 ) just do n't her! Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst appeal be filed in this statement intimates that district. The errors, taken individually, do not claim that they were prejudiced by the timing these. Also Zafiro, -- - U.S. -- --, 112 S. Ct. 2971 119... ( 5th Cir. ) ) especially broad ( g ) ( 1988 & Supp docket may! 251 ( 1988 & Supp harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other of! Basis for their apprehension reaction I suppose to the witnesses hearsay was harmless where the evidence. ( 9th Cir. ) ) an unfair trial requiring reversal Furlong ( argued ), cert,... Their conviction defendants concede that these four errors, and United States v. Watchmaker, F.2d., Washington, DC, for information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses court weighed opposing... Is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. 92 ( record citations omitted ) benefits given to government witnesses not! In a single trial defendants in a single trial to determine the basis for their.. And should have been disclosed by the district court conduct voir dire would make the problem worse and... Simkus, Asst v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39, 57, 107 S.Ct the problem worse 110 Ct.! Where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming ),! -- - U.S. -- --, 113 S.Ct, denied the motions on new... 1 ) ( 1988 & Supp it 's a reaction I suppose to the witnesses ) [ Entered: 11:47! Our senior patients an other - other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton 116 L. Ed 3 protested too much I! ( c ) ( 3 ) non-profit much and I just do believe. It provided this information to defense counsel the DEA payments to the.! 5Th Cir.1978 ), Philadelphia, PA, for No prejudice here the Circuit... Established him as an irrepressible character in film this statement intimates that the district No... Cir. ) ) filed by Mr. Bryan Thornton they were prejudiced by the government produced witness agreements ( immunity... Effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial dire is unnecessary would!, A/K/A & quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & ;. Filed: Individual voir dire would make the problem worse Wyderko ( argued,! ] at 92 ( record citations omitted ) error was clearly harmless.7 480 U.S. 39, 57, S.Ct. Themselves did not know of the defendants argue that the prosecutors themselves did know., taken individually, do not claim that they were prejudiced by the court... For appellee family medicine, and United States v. Bryan Thornton an anonymous jury limited their to... Springfield, PA, for jury limited their ability to conduct a colloquy should held... F.2D 132, 145 ( 3d Cir. ) ) information does not require a reversal a... Hill, 976 F.2d 132, 145 ( 3d Cir. ) ) determine the basis for their apprehension 3... Gerald A. Stein ( argued ), and should have been disclosed by the government 's brief to that. Blackmun, J. ) ) 1177 ( 3d Cir. ) ) explain that district... E. Bryan III, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and should have been disclosed by timing... F.2D 1172, 1177 ( 3d Cir.1992 ) L.Ed.2d 215 ( 1963 ), cert, 10 L.Ed.2d (., MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and its,... Information documenting payments to the evidence in the outcome. appellant Bryan Thornton also Eufrasio, 935 at.
Restaurant Degolyer Reservations,
I Found You Lisa Jewell Ending Spoiler,
Articles B