United States v. Arillotta
529 F. App'x 81
| 2d Cir. | 2013Background
- Defendants appeal after judgments of conviction following a jury trial in SDNY.
- District court denied Fotios and Ty Geas’s February 11, 2011 continuance request; prior continuances were granted and discovery review was facilitated.
- Court held ex parte government materials regarding Brady/Giglio did not require disclosure after independent review; no Brady/Giglio violation found.
- Nigro challenged district court’s failure to sua sponte recuse; appellate standard reviewed for abuse of discretion or plain error.
- Court empaneled an anonymous jury due to concerns including obstruction of justice and potential pre-trial publicity; district court’s decision reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Evidence sufficiency for challenged counts upheld; Nigro, Fotios, and Ty Geas challenged some trial arguments and jury instructions, all rejected on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continuance denial abuse of discretion | Geas argues denial prejudiced defense | Geas asserts need for more time to prepare | No abuse; discretion exercised appropriately |
| Brady/Giglio nondisclosure | Government withheld ex parte materials | Disclosures required if material to guilt/punishment | No duty to disclose on independent review; not material to fair trial |
| Recusal | Judge should have recused | Failure to recuse constitutes error | No plain error; no abuse of discretion demonstrated |
| Anonymous jury | Publicity and murder-for-obstruction justify anonymity | Unnecessary or prejudicial anonymity | District court did not abuse discretion; factors supported anonymity |
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Evidence supports convictions | Insufficient or improper evidence | Evidence sufficient to support convictions |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963) (duty to disclose favorable material; not all exculpatory material must be disclosed)
- Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (U.S. 1972) (impeachment material disclosures; not all material need be disclosed)
- United States v. O’Connor, 650 F.3d 839 (2d Cir. 2011) (continuance denials reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- United States v. Chin, 476 F.3d 144 (2d Cir. 2007) (prejudice from lack of continuance; record discussed)
- United States v. Abu-Jihaad, 630 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2010) (nondisclosure rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion; de novo review for materiality)