United States v. Lyttle
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1870
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Eldridge charged by sealed indictment (Aug. 18, 2005) with multiple fraud and money laundering counts related to a high-yield investment program.
- Last act alleged in June 2000; ordinarily § 3282 would expire the statute in June 2005.
- District court issued a sealed ex parte § 3292 tolling order (Sept. 15, 2004) to pursue foreign evidence from Hungary.
- Official MLAT request to Hungary (Aug. 26, 2004) sought records on Hungarian accounts; Hungary later provided some, but not all, records (Feb. 2006).
- Eldridge moved to dismiss in 2007 arguing tolling invalid; district court denied; trial resulted in a conviction and 20-year sentence.
- On appeal, Eldridge contends insufficient evidence for tolling, improper ex parte procedure, and alternative domestic avenues for records.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of § 3292 tolling evidence | Eldridge: record insufficient to show foreign evidence and official request. | Lyttle (government) argues sufficient evidence supported tolling. | Evidence sufficient; tolling upheld. |
| Foreign evidence necessity for tolling | Eldridge: foreign evidence must be necessary for indictment. | Lyttle: no, necessity not required; evidence need only exist. | § 3292 does not require foreign evidence to be necessary for indictment. |
| Ex parte tolling proceedings | Eldridge: ex parte proceedings improper; she deserves notice/hearing. | Lyttle: ex parte is permissible for § 3292 determinations. | Ex parte proceedings permitted; no automatic right to notice/hearing. |
| Scope of evidence for tolling when pre-tolling indictment possible | Eldridge: government already had sufficient evidence to indict without foreign records. | Lyttle: tolling is allowed even if some evidence exists; not required to be pivotal. | Tolling valid even where non-foreign evidence existed; not mandatory to be pivotal. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jenkins, 633 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 2011) (evidence-based standard for § 3292 tolling)
- United States v. Trainor, 376 F.3d 1325 (11th Cir. 2004) (sworn evidence supports tolling; unsworn alone insufficient)
- DeGeorge v. U.S. District Court, 219 F.3d 930 (9th Cir. 2000) (non-adversarial, secret nature of § 3292 proceedings)
- United States v. Hoffecker, 530 F.3d 137 (3d Cir. 2008) (affirmed ex parte tolling under § 3292)
- United States v. Torres, 318 F.3d 1058 (11th Cir. 2003) (ex parte preindictment § 3292 proceedings)
- United States v. Wilson, 249 F.3d 366 (5th Cir. 2001) (preindictment ex parte tolling; abrogated on other grounds)
- Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (U.S. 1972) (grand jury investigations intrinsic to thoroughness)
- United States v. R. Enters., Inc., 498 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1991) (grand jury investigation process)