Wilson

United States v. Wilson

Good Law
18 F. App'x 611
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 5, 2001Nos. 99-50547, 99-50552, 99-50614, 99-50615; D.C. Nos. CR-98-00975-R-01, CR-98-00975-R-03California726 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants Mitchell and Wilson are two of five men involved in a conspiracy to rob a Loomis-Fargo armored vehicle in 1998. Both men appeal their convictions and sentences on various evidentiary and sentencing grounds.

Wilson Appeal

The district court acted within its discretion in denying the motion to sever the trials. See Sandoval v. Calderon, 241 F.3d 765, 772 (9th Cir.2001). Nor did the court err by excluding Wilson’s family members from the courtroom. The safety of the witness was a substantial reason for partial closure and such closure was sufficiently tailored to satisfy the purpose for which the exclusion was ordered. See United States v. Sherlock, 962 F.2d 1349, 1356 (9th Cir.1992). Further, the witness’ testimony was cumulative; therefore, any procedural deficiency was harmless.

Re-reading the Pinkerton jury instruction, without the remaining conspiracy instructions being read again, was not error. There was ample evidence to support the jury’s finding that Wilson was an active conspirator. See United States v. Estrada-Macias, 218 F.3d 1064, 1066 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted).

A trial court violates the Confrontation Clause only if its ruling…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.