United States v. Joann Wiggan, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23861

Wiggan, SBC facilities technician, was interviewed by FBI in 2004 about a Pellicano wiretap conspiracy.
Turner’s records showed multiple calls to Wiggan’s SBC voicemail (323-889-0813) which Wiggan denied receiving.
Wiggan testified before a grand jury in 2005-2006 denying having retrieved Turner’s messages and claimed limited contact with Turner.
A mistrial occurred on Count Three at Wiggan’s first trial; a first superseding indictment reasserted Counts on perjury before the grand jury and false FBI statement.
At the 2009 trial the government called the Grand Jury foreman, Venable, to testify about Wiggan’s credibility; Wiggan was convicted on all counts; the conviction was reversed on appeal due to Rule 403 error.
The district court’s denial of recantation as a defense and sufficiency challenges were reviewed; the court ultimately reversed and remanded for all three counts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether grand juror Venable’s testimony violated Rule 403	Wiggan	Government	Yes; abuse of discretion, prejudicial impact outweighed probative value
Whether Wiggan properly recanted under 18 U.S.C. § 1623(d)	Wiggan	Government	Recantation not properly timely; not a jury issue; bar to prosecution was not met
Insufficiency of the evidence for perjury at first trial	Wiggan	Government	Sufficient evidence to support guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Whether the recantation issue should have been submitted to the jury	Wiggan	Government	Recantation issue is a legal question for the court, not a jury question

Awadallah v. United States, 436 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2006) (grand-jury testimony risks of prejudice; Rule 403 concerns)
Awadallah, 401 F.Supp.2d 308 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (district court ruling on grand jury testimony dangers)
Hankey, 203 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2000) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
Sine, 493 F.3d 1021 (9th Cir. 2007) (prejudice from judicial remarks; limits on credibility opinions)