United States v. Freddie Hankins

MEMORANDUM

A jury convicted Freddie Hankins of making a false statement within the jurisdiction of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (a)(2) and of submitting a false record of fish intended for transportation in interstate commerce in violation of 16 U.S.C. §§ 3372 (d)(2), 3373(d)(3)(A)(ii). He appeals the district court’s admission of testimony rebutting his expert witness and its denial of his motion for a new trial. He also asserts the constitutional inadequacy of his trial counsel. We affirm.

1. The admission of the prosecution expert’s rebuttal testimony concerning matters undisclosed before trial was not in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(a)(1)(G). Rebuttal testimony is not subject to pretrial disclosure. The government need not disclose even the names of rebuttal witnesses. See, e.g., United States v. Gering, 716 F.2d 615, 621 (9th Cir.1983). A fortiori, it need not disclose the contents of their testimony.

Further, the defense expert’s testimony opened up areas of inquiry properly subject to rebuttal testimony. See United States v. Beck, 418 F.3d 1008, 1016 (9th Cir.2005) (condoning the admission of testimony to rebut a defense…