462 F. App'x 735
9th Cir.2011Background
- Seldons were convicted on fourteen counts of mail fraud and one count of misbranding a drug; they appeal the denial of a new trial.
- They contend the government violated Brady v. Maryland by not disclosing Livdahl’s Florida affidavit that contradicted his trial testimony.
- The district court found the affidavit would not have affected the jury’s verdict and that Livdahl perjured himself seeking a government benefit.
- Livdahl admitted perjury at trial; the court instructed the jury to view his testimony with greater caution.
- Additional evidence showed Livdahl’s brother and a software engineer altered TRItox records; Elizabeth Long testified about Dr. Seldon’s seminar statements and TRItox usage.
- The court affirmed, holding the affidavit was not material and would not change the outcome.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brady materiality of the Florida affidavit | Seldons claim suppression violated Brady. | State the affidavit was not material to the verdict. | Affirmed; affidavit not material; no reasonable probability of different outcome. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ross, 372 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2004) (de novo review of Brady failure)
- United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (S. Ct. 1985) (materiality of Brady evidence)
- Barker v. Fleming, 423 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2005) (impeachment grounds for evidence; timing matters)
- Silva v. Brown, 416 F.3d 980 (9th Cir. 2005) (new and different grounds of impeachment)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (S. Ct. 1995) (due process and suppression considerations)