United States v. Karen Sypher
684 F.3d 622
6th Cir.2012Background
- Sypher was convicted on six federal counts arising from alleged extortion of University of Louisville basketball coach Rick Pitino after an FBI investigation.
- The July 21, 2003 meeting between Sypher and Pitino led to contested allegations of rape, pregnancy, and Pitino's role in arranging an abortion.
- Testimony from Lester Goetzinger alleged Sypher instructed him to call Pitino anonymously to obtain money and favors for Sypher.
- The criminal complaint was filed April 24, 2010; a Superceding Indictment was returned November 18, 2010.
- Sypher, after trial, moved for a new trial on newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance; new counsel pursued post-trial motions including requests to recuse the judge and other relief, which the district court denied; the Sixth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| New trial based on newly discovered evidence | Sypher asserts newly discovered evidence warrants a new trial | Government argues standard not met; evidence not newly discovered or material | No abuse of discretion; no newly discovered evidence shown |
| Change of venue | Pretrial publicity prevented fair trial | Voir dire sufficed; no presumptive prejudice established | District court did not abuse discretion; no presumption of prejudice |
| Access to post-trial evidence and documents | Request for original voice exemplars and photographs should be granted | No legal authority requiring such post-trial discovery | District court did not abuse discretion in denying post-trial access |
| Recusal of district judge | Judge biased against Sypher | No demonstrated personal or extrajudicial bias | No abuse of discretion; recusal denied |
| Cumulative error | Cumulative effect of errors requires a new trial | No single error shown; no cumulative prejudice | No cumulative error warranting reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pierce, 62 F.3d 818 (6th Cir. 1995) (abuse of discretion standard for Rule 33 motions)
- United States v. Hanna, 661 F.3d 271 (6th Cir. 2011) (new-trial standard for newly discovered evidence)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1983) (plain-error standard for pretrial release of juror questionnaires)
- Foley v. Parker, 488 F.3d 377 (6th Cir. 2007) (Voir dire and prejudicial publicity considerations)
- Jamieson v. United States, 427 F.3d 394 (6th Cir. 2005) (standard for venue-change motions and prejudice)