Levine

United States v. Levine

Good Law
175 F. App'x 166
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 24, 2006No. 03-50347California457 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Marc David Levine (“Levine”) was convicted of participating in a criminal telemarketing organization and thus violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 , 371, 1341, 1343, 1956(h), and 1956(a)(1)(A)(i). The district court sentenced Levine to a term of 292 months and a three-year term of supervised release.

We conclude that the district court did not err in denying Levine’s motions to sever, in allowing testimony on privileged attorney-client matters, or in admitting hearsay testimony. However, we conclude that the matter should be remanded to the district court pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005).

The district court did not err in denying the motions to sever. “To be entitled to severance on the basis of mutually antagonistic defenses, a defendant must show that the core of the codefendant’s defense is so irreconcilable with the core of his own defense that the acceptance of the codefendant’s theory by the jury precludes acquittal of the defendant.” United States v. Throckmorton, 87 F.3d 1069, 1072 (9th Cir.1996). Here, Levine did not meet his burden. His defense was not mutually antagonistic with his co-defendants because an acquittal did not depend…

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.