Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

09-1190, 09-1224, 09-1225, 09-1226, 09-1227 & 09-1251 U.S. v. Benabe

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 18, 2011//

09-1190, 09-1224, 09-1225, 09-1226, 09-1227 & 09-1251 U.S. v. Benabe

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 18, 2011//

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure
Right to be present

Where defendants obstructed every pretrial hearing, and refused to agree not to speak during trial without permission, the district court properly refused to permit them to be present during the trial.

“The defendants regularly spoke out of turn, sidelined the legitimate business of the court, and wasted valuable judicial resources with their baseless immunity claims. The district judge was rightly concerned that Delatorre and Benabe would speak out of turn and espouse their theories in front of the jury, causing confusion, prejudicing their co-defendants, and tainting a carefully screened jury pool. In that equation, the defendants’ relative politeness simply does not matter, and we will not second-guess Judge Castillo’s assessment. We are also unpersuaded by the defendants’ argument that their pre-trial behavior was not an appropriate predictor of how they would behave before the jury. These defendants were relentless in their interruptions, consistently attempting to derail nearly every pre-trial status conference they attended. Nevertheless, after clearly explaining the risks and consequences, Judge Castillo gave them each one final opportunity to assure him that they would not disrupt the proceedings after the case was called and the prospective jurors brought into the courtroom. They each refused to give that assurance. The combination of their pretrial behavior and their refusal to promise to control their behavior at trial was a sufficiently reliable indicator of trouble, threatening the ability of the other defendants to receive a fair trial. Judge Castillo did not err in relying on these defendants’ past performances and their refusals to promise to behave appropriately before the jury.”

Affirmed.

09-1190, 09-1224, 09-1225, 09-1226, 09-1227 & 09-1251 U.S. v. Benabe

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Castillo, J., Hamilton, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests