United States v. Philip J. Goldberg

Goldberg appeals from the district court’s determination on remand from the United States Supreme Court that certain writings were not producible in his criminal trial under either the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500 , or the rule of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). We affirm in part and reverse in part.

■ I. Facts and Prior Proceedings

Appellant was convicted on fourteen counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1341 , each charging him with a separate transactional instance of use of the mail for the purpose of executing a fraudulent scheme of issuing single-premium annuity life insurance policies, falsely purporting to be premium fully prepaid, for use by the annuitant as collateral for loans.

The Government’s case against Goldberg consisted primarily of the testimony of Newman, a fellow employee. Prior to the trial, the Government delivered to appellant a copy of Newman’s testimony before the grand jury and a memorandum of an interview of Newman conducted by two Government lawyers, Keilp and Lebowitz. The transcript of that interview' indicated that the lawyers intended to conduct further interviews. At trial during his cross-examination, Newman…