United States v. Daugerdas
867 F. Supp. 2d 445
S.D.N.Y.2012Background
- A three-month tax shelter fraud trial with 9,200 pages of testimony and over 2.2 million discovery documents concluded in a split verdict against Daugerdas, Guerin, Field, and Parse, with Brubaker acquitted.
- Juror Catherine Conrad, seated as Juror No. 1, lied during voir dire about education, occupation, residence, and prior legal history, and concealed that she was a suspended attorney with an alcohol problem.
- Conrad authored a May letter praising the government’s prosecution and revealing deliberations, prompting defense investigators to uncover her true identity and background.
- Bruñe & Richard and Parse’s team conducted pre- and post-verdict research, including a Westlaw report and internal emails, indicating Conrad’s true identity and disqualifying background.
- Despite red flags, Parse’s counsel did not disclose or pursue further inquiry before deliberations; multiple opportunities to alert the court or investigate were neglected.
- A December 20 and February 15, 2012 hearings explored Conrad’s perjury and the impact on the trial; the court found Conrad’s conduct created bias and warranted relief for three defendants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Conrad’s juror misconduct warrants a new trial | Government argues misconduct tainted verdict and required reversal for three defendants | Parse’s team failed to disclose, but misconduct could be waiveable and not always reversible | Granted for Daugerdas, Guerin, Field; denied for Parse |
| Whether Parse waived his right to challenge the juror misconduct | Government contends waiver did not apply to parse due to pre-verdict knowledge | Parse’s counsel could have discovered misconduct earlier and waived rights by failure to object timely | Waiver found; Parse’s motion denied |
| Whether Parse's attorneys acted with reasonable diligence in discovering Conrad’s true identity | Government argues initial pre-verdict information should have prompted inquiry | Parse’s team relied on voir dire answers and limitations of information | Lack of reasonable diligence supports waiver and relief denied for Parse |
| Whether Conrad’s lies created actual/implied/inferable bias requiring a new trial | Government contends Conrad’s deceit demonstrated actual bias and irreparable prejudice | Parse argues no demonstrable bias and that the verdict remains valid | Court found Conrad's lies created actual, implied, and inferable bias; new trials granted for three defendants |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548 (U.S. 1984) (truthful voir dire required for impartial jury; establishes standard for new trial due to juror dishonesty)
- Colombo v. United States, 869 F.2d 149 (2d Cir. 1989) (overturns verdict when juror lies to obtain seat on jury)
- Bolinger, 837 F.2d 436 (11th Cir. 1988) (waiver principles when defense remains silent about juror misconduct)