United States v. Michael Sidney Walk

*418 OPINION

Defendant Walk was indicted for bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). Defendant moved for discovery of “any and all proported [sic] confessions, admissions, or statements made by [defendant], within the possession, custody or control of the government . . . At issue were statements made by the defendant to a third-party witness, which statements were reported by the witness to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and written by the F.B.I. in the form of memoranda of the interview of the witness.

Pursuant to Rule 16(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the trial court ordered the government to produce all language in the witness’ statements attributable to the defendant, and the government refused. The trial court dismissed the indictment, and the government appeals therefrom.

The Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500 , controls in this case, and we therefore reverse the district court’s dismissal and order that the statements be produced only in accordance with the provisions of the Jencks Act.

Rule 16(a)(1) allows discovery of a written or recorded statement made by the defendant. 1 A statement need not be actually written or typed by the…

(dissenting):

I respectfully dissent.

Despite the majority’s semantic, legerdemain, I remain unpersuaded that a statement originating out of a defendant’s mouth — a statement which can be used against that defendant as an admission at his trial — ceases to be his statement for purposes of discovery simply because it is reported to the government by a third person. Simply put, a defendant’s statement is a defendant’s statement; it matters not who repeats it, it remains his statement. To me, that conclusion is manifest.

By way of background, the record shows that defendant Walk was indicted for bank robbery ( 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a)) and subsequently entered a plea of not guilty. He then filed a pretrial motion for discovery, seeking, inter alia,

During oral argument of the motion, the Assistant U.S. Attorney revealed that the defendant himself had made statements to a person who was not a government employee; that this person had been interviewed by agents of the F.B.I.; and that F.B.I. memoranda of those interviews, which included the person’s version of defendant’s statements, were in custody of the government. Defense counsel argued that these memoranda were discoverable prior…

533 F.2d 417 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael Sidney WALK, Defendant-Appellee. No. 74-1899. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Dec. 19, 1975. Bruce Babcock, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. Milton Kerlan, Jr. (argued), Sacramento, Cal., for defendant-appellee.OPINION Before KOELSCH and SNEED, Circuit Judges, and FIRTH, * District Judge. SNEED, Circuit Judge: 1 Defendant Walk was indicted for bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). Defendant moved for discovery of "any and all proported (sic ) confessions, admissions, or statements made by (defendant), within the possession, custody or control of the government . . . ." At issue were statements made by the defendant to a third-party witness, which statements were reported by the witness to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and written by the F.B.I. in the form of memoranda of the interview of the witness. 2 Pursuant to Rule 16(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the trial court ordered the government to produce all language in the witness' statements attributable to the defendant, and the government refused. The trial…