Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sufficiency of Evidence – Court Error

By: Derek Hawkins//May 9, 2016//

Sufficiency of Evidence – Court Error

By: Derek Hawkins//May 9, 2016//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. David A Resnick

Case No.: 14-3791

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and BAUER and SYKES, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sufficiency of Evidence – Court Error

Court made no error in admittance of evidence, appellant forfeited objections at trial.

“Ultimately, however, the proper characterization does not matter here. A Fifth Amendment self‐incrimination violation is not structural error. See Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 (1967) (holding Fifth Amendment self‐incrimination error not grounds for reversal of conviction if proven harmless “beyond a reasonable doubt”); Jumper, 497 F.3d at 703 (same). Thus, if the district court committed Fifth Amendment error (a question we need not decide), we must still decide whether any such error was “plain.” We have never before held that the refusal to take a polygraph implicates the Fifth Amendment. Moreover, Resnick’s refusal to take a polygraph was mentioned only once by each side during closing, the evidence against him was very strong, and his defense did not depend on his credibility because he did not take the stand at trial. It is Resnick’s burden to “make a specific showing of prejudice” in order to satisfy the “substantial rights” part of the plain error analysis. Olano, 507 U.S. at 735. He has not done so. The dissent overstates matters when it says, post at 7, that “only an innocent defendant could have his conviction reversed” under the approach to plain error we have taken. Any defendant who can point to an error that affected his “substantial rights” (and the other criteria of Olano) can show plain error. Resnick’s problem is that any error in admitting the testimony about his reluctance to submit to a polygraph was not plain and did not affect his substantial rights in light of the record as a whole. It therefore does not support reversal of his conviction”

Affirmed

Full Text


Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.

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