United States v. Piazza
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15033
5th Cir.2011Background
- Pizza defendant Chad Piazza was convicted of felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- Piazza moved for a new trial alleging newly discovered evidence; the district court granted the motion after applying the Berry rule’s five factors.
- New evidence was a sworn affidavit from Darrin Piazza describing Jed Piazza’s role and actions in the gun sale.
- District court found the evidence newly discovered, not due to defendant’s lack of diligence, not merely cumulative, material, and likely to yield acquittal.
- Government appealed the grant of a new trial; Fifth Circuit affirmed, concluding the Berry factors were satisfied.
- Key procedural posture: standard of review is abuse of discretion for Rule 33 motions; Berry rule governs new-trial determinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the new evidence was newly discovered at trial | United States contends evidence was not newly discovered | Piazza asserts evidence was newly discovered and unknown | Yes; evidence was newly discovered and unknown at trial |
| Whether failure to detect the new evidence showed due diligence | United States argues defense was diligent | Piazza showed reasonable diligence under Beasley/Peña | Yes; defense diligence found sufficient under Berry analysis |
| Whether the evidence is not merely cumulative or impeaching | United States claims evidence is cumulative | Piazza asserts it provides actual new facts | Yes; evidence was not merely cumulative or impeaching |
| Whether the evidence is material | United States asserts limited materiality | Piazza argues material because it affects guilt attribution to Jed | Yes; material to whether another person committed the acts |
| Whether the newly discovered evidence would likely produce an acquittal | United States claims unlikely to change verdict | Piazza contends it would probably produce acquittal | Yes; district court did not err in finding a probable acquittal form of outcome |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wall, 389 F.3d 457 (5th Cir. 2004) (abuse-of-discretion standard for Rule 33 determinations; deference to district court)
- United States v. Beasley, 582 F.2d 337 (5th Cir. 1978) (witness availability and diligence considerations in new-trial motions)
- United States v. Peña, 949 F.2d 751 (5th Cir. 1991) (due diligence and independent investigation; government not required to call witnesses)
- Berry v. Georgia, 10 Ga. 511 (1851) (five-factor Berry rule for new-trial based on newly discovered evidence)