The government produced witness agreements (including immunity agreements) and information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses. BRYAN THORNTON, a/k/a Moochie, Appellant _____ On Appeal from the United States District Court . III 1991),1 and possession of a firearm after having been previously convicted of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. 4/21/92 Tr. All three defendants were sentenced under the United States Sentencing Guidelines to life imprisonment, and Thornton and Jones were each ordered to forfeit $6,230,000 to the government pursuant to 21 U.S.C. endobj The district court erred in admitting a statement by a government witness that one of the defendants named in the indictment had stated that "he was having some problems with [members of the JBM] that they were trying to make [him] get down and he didn't want to get involved but they were coming at him too strong." 122 0 obj denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. ), cert. In light of the non-disclosure by the DEA agents in this case, we believe that the prosecutors have an obligation to establish procedures, such as requiring written responses, which will ensure that the responsible agents are fully cognizant of their disclosure . You're all set! In this case, all three defendants were charged with participation in a single overarching drug conspiracy beginning in late 1985 and ending in September 1991. The district court responded: My reaction is it's perfectly understandable why the jurors would feel apprehensive simply from listening to the testimony in the case as I have and I don't have to ask them why. R. Crim. United States v. Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 (3d Cir. See, e.g., United States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 (5th Cir.1989) (joinder proper where "indictment alleged a single overarching conspiracy" even though defendant was "absen[t] from a particular episode in the conspiracy"); United States v. Nerlinger, 862 F.2d 967, 973 (2d Cir.1988) (joinder proper even though defendants' "respective acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy occurred during chronologically distinct periods").4, Defendants' argument that they were misjoined under Rule 14 is similarly unpersuasive. t8x.``QbdU20 H H 124 0 obj All three defendants were sentenced under the United States Sentencing Guidelines to life imprisonment, and Thornton and Jones were each ordered to forfeit $6,230,000 to the government pursuant to 21 U.S.C. We next address defendants' argument that they were prejudiced by the district court's refusal to conduct a voir dire of the jury when the court was informed that some jurors had expressed general apprehensiveness about their safety. 91-00570-03).UNITED STATES of Americav.Aaron JONES, a/k/a "A", "J", Appellant (D.C. Criminal No.91-00570-01).UNITED STATES of Americav.Bernard FIELDS, a/k/a "Quadir", "Q", Appellant (D.C.Criminal No. 664, 121 L.Ed.2d 588 (1992). at 2378. You can explore additional available newsletters here. ("The judge's decision whether to interrogate the jury about juror misconduct is within his sound discretion, especially when the alleged prejudice results from statements made by the jurors themselves, and not from media publicity or other outside influences. I've observed him sitting here day in and day out. [He saw] Juror No. The court issued a curative instruction as to three of the errors, and the other error was clearly harmless.7. The prosecutors have an obligation to make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a potential connection with the witnesses. 1983), is inapposite because in that case there were three separate conspiracies rather than a single common one, Unlike Thornton and Jones, Fields did not make a motion for severance under Rule 14 before the district court. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents(Masthead Logo Link)/Rect[72.0 648.0 126.0 707.5]/StructParent 1/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. The government produced witness agreements (including immunity agreements) and information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses. denied, 441 U.S. 922, 99 S.Ct. App. July 19th, 1993, Precedential Status: 924(c) (1) (1988 & Supp. Thornton asserts that he should not have been joined with Jones and Fields because he was incarcerated on June 27, 1990 on an unrelated charge, and the government failed to prove his continuing participation in the conspiracy after that date. e d u / t h i r d c i r c u i t _ 2 0 2 2 / 5 9 1)/Rect[72.0 142.9906 354.085 154.7094]/StructParent 8/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> The district court denied the motion, stating, "I think Juror No. of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee. "), cert. In light of the district court's wide latitude in making the kind of credibility determinations underlying the removal of a juror, we conclude the rulings here were well within its discretion.D. Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive." Baldwin County Sheriff's Office. 12 during the trial. See also Zafiro, --- U.S. at ----, 113 S. Ct. at 937 ("There is a preference in the federal system for joint trials of defendants who are indicted together."). 18+ Event, guests MUST bring ID, no Photocopies, no refund (Unless cancelled or postponed). Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. startxref Bay Minette Police Department. This case has been cited by other opinions: The following opinions cover similar topics: CourtListener is a project of Free 2d 769 (1990). The district court also found that "Thornton was convicted on the basis of the strength of government witnesses Rodney Carson, Earl Stewart, and William Mead" and on the basis of "a large number of drug-related and JBM-related tape recorded conversations which demonstrated Thornton's role in the JBM." III 1991), and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. [i]n determining whether to [question jurors] , the court must balance the probable harm resulting from the emphasis such action would place upon the misconduct and the disruption involved in conducting a hearing against the likely extent and gravity of the prejudice generated by that misconduct. Although he was never a Mouseketeer, he appeared in . Precedential, Citations: We will address each of these allegations seriatim. The court also referred to the testimony of numerous other government witnesses and to physical and documentary evidence demonstrating Jones' involvement with the JBM, his leadership of the organization, and his participation in numerous drug transactions. Posted by . Defendants make, in combination, six claims of error which they argue require a reversal of their convictions and a new trial. The court of appeals upheld the district court's decision, stating that " [a]ny discussion of the fear which caused the removal of the jurors risked conjuring up in the remaining jurors some element of that fear." In order for the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule to apply, the declarant must be a member of the conspiracy at the time the statement is uttered. 4/21/92 Tr. 1991). Receive free daily summaries of new opinions from the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit . Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count. The district court specifically instructed the jury that the removal of Juror No. See Grooms v. Wainwright, 610 F.2d 344, 347 (5th Cir.) Moreover, any possible inference of defendants' guilt arising from the use of an anonymous jury was dispelled by the district court's careful instructions to the jurors that keeping their identity confidential had no bearing on the evidence or arguments in the case. 2971, 119 L.Ed.2d 590 (1992). A collection of correspondences between Nancy and Ronald Reaga . 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses. We disagree. 914 F.2d at 944. 2d 588 (1992). P. 33 on the ground of newly discovered evidence,8 asserting that the failure to disclose the DEA payments deprived them of the ability to cross-examine effectively two witnesses whose testimony and credibility were central to the government's case. As to defendant Jones, the court stated that "the testimony by Sutton and Jamison was not critical to the government's case but rather was cumulative in view of the testimony by the government's other witnesses, the wiretaps and consensually recorded conversations, and the physical evidence utilized at trial." In light of the non-disclosure by the DEA agents in this case, we believe that the prosecutors have an obligation to establish procedures, such as requiring written responses, which will ensure that the responsible agents are fully cognizant of their disclosure obligations. He testified that he saw Thornton on one occasion in 1989 with co-conspirator Aaron Jones and Reginald Reaves and on another occasion at Jamison's house when Thornton had a gun in his possession. The government contends that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial of Thornton's and Jones' new trial motions because they failed to file a second notice of appeal from the district court's denial of the post-trial motions. It seems to me a colloquy is going to make the problem worse and the best way to do it is to treat it in a low key way. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. 1991), cert. Kennedy was dating Neisha Witherspoon Jones' baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased. Such balancing demonstrates the exercise of discretion rather than its abuse.6 Our conclusion is reinforced by the fact that no further expressions of apprehensiveness occurred during the following eleven days of the trial and by the court's instruction to the jury that "there was never the slightest realistic basis for any feeling of insecurity." We, as an appellate tribunal, are in a poor position to evaluate these competing considerations; we have only an insentient record before us. 989, 1001, 94 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987) (quoting United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682, 105 S.Ct. ", The Rule provides in relevant part: "If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment or information or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or separated trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires. at 743. 2d 789 (1980). "), cert. Join Facebook to connect with Brian Thornton and others you may know. In response, Fields moved to strike Juror No. at 93. I'm inclined to follow [the Marshal's] advice and not make a big deal out of it. About Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features Press Copyright Contact us Creators . 1 F.3d 149, Docket Number: endobj e d u / t h i r d c i r c u i t _ 2 0 2 2)/Rect[230.8867 210.4406 492.0049 222.1594]/StructParent 7/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> <>/MediaBox[0 0 612 792]/Parent 119 0 R/Resources<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageC]/XObject<>>>/Rotate 0/StructParents 0/Tabs/S/Type/Page>> We However, any error in this regard is clearly harmless in light of the testimony of other witnesses that the JBM threatened drug dealers in Philadelphia to "get down or lay down." 2d 917 (1986), but we believe these cases support the government. Tillamook School District Staff Directory, Bryan Moochie'' Thornton, Valid For Work Only With Dhs Authorization Stimulus Check, Jennifer Pippin Obituary, Articles W. previous. More recently, in United States v. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 (3d Cir. Facebook gives people the power. Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges. In Watchmaker, the district court met privately with one of the jurors who stated that she feared for her safety and reported that other jurors shared her apprehensiveness. 126 0 obj In Dowling, the district court received a note from a juror stating that another juror "is being prejudice [sic] on this case" because she had read newspaper articles describing the defendant's extensive criminal history and discussed this information with other jurors. at 93. 130 0 obj 1985) (citation omitted), cert. 131 0 obj " Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39, 57, 107 S. Ct. 989, 1001, 94 L. Ed. The jury found Fields not guilty of one count of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense, Under the Rule, "Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. Defendants do not claim that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire. Filed: %%EOF endobj Hill, 976 F.2d at 139. The prosecutors have an obligation to make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a potential connection with the witnesses. Bryan Thornton appeals from an order of the District Court, entered September 9, 2021, denying his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Moreover, the indictment alleged as overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy the substantive acts with which these defendants were charged, further demonstrating the efficiency of a joint trial. It follows that we may not consider his claim on appeal. The Supreme Court has stated that we must "presume that a jury will follow an instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence inadvertently presented to it, unless there is an overwhelming probability that the jury will be unable to follow the court's instructions, and a strong likelihood that the effect of the evidence would be devastating to the defendant." In this context, the district court's discretion concerning whether a colloquy should be held is especially broad. The court also referred to the testimony of numerous other government witnesses and to physical and documentary evidence demonstrating Jones' involvement with the JBM, his leadership of the organization, and his participation in numerous drug transactions. 935 F.2d at 568. at 744-45. the record obituaries stockton, ca; press box football stadium; is dr amy still with dr jeff; onenote resize image aspect ratio App. On October 2, 1991 a grand jury in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania returned a thirty-two count indictment charging Thornton, Jones, Fields, and twenty-three others with conspiracy to distribute cocaine, crack cocaine, and heroin between late 1985 and September 1991. App. 1991) (admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming). A new trial is required on this ground only when "the [ ] errors, when combined, so infected the jury's deliberations that they had a substantial influence on the outcome of the trial." A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir.1991). We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. The defendants do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. Theater of popular music. Player Combine on April 11; Live Draft Airing April 12 on FS1. Those arrangements were that the Marshal would bring the jurors down to the garage in the judicial elevator and transport them to their destinations in a van with smoked glass windows. Defendants next argue that the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury. See United States v. Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 (3d Cir.1987) (in banc). Address 701 E. Parkcenter Blvd. 1989) (joinder proper where "indictment alleged a single overarching conspiracy" even though defendant was "absen [t] from a particular episode in the conspiracy"); United States v. Nerlinger, 862 F.2d 967, 973 (2d Cir. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 (quotation and emphasis omitted). Motown Drug Game Muscle Chuckie Hardaway Murdered Days Removed From Walking Out Of Pen In '07 ", Thornton's citation to United States v. Ellis, 709 F.2d 688 (11th Cir. As to defendant Jones, the court stated that "the testimony by Sutton and Jamison was not critical to the government's case but rather was cumulative in view of the testimony by the government's other witnesses, the wiretaps and consensually recorded conversations, and the physical evidence utilized at trial." Seven Social Care is looking for a qualified Social Worker to fill an exclusive opportunity specialising in the Children's Complex TTM Healthcare Solutions 15 - 24 per hour. Bryan Thornton, A/K/A "Moochie", (d.c. Criminal No. hippie fest 2022 michigan; family picture poses for 5 adults; unforgettable who killed rachel; pacific northwest college of art notable alumni; adler sense of belonging family constellation Christopher G. Furlong (argued), Springfield, PA, for appellant Bryan Thornton. At age 7, he started appearing as 'Moochie' in 1956 on "Adventures in Dairyland," a serial short that took place on a dude ranch with fellow child actor David Stollery who played 'Marty.' David Stollery said, "Moochie - an adorable, talkative kid who was always getting into jams - was not far removed from the real-life Corcoran. endobj At the fifteen-day jury trial that followed, the government introduced a substantial amount of evidence in support of its charges against the three defendants, including the testimony of ten cooperating witnesses who were members of or who had had direct dealings with the JBM, more than sixty wiretapped or consensually recorded conversations concerning members of the JBM, and physical evidence, including documents, photographs, drugs, weapons, and drug-related paraphernalia. at 92 (record citations omitted). P. 8(b)2 de novo and the denial of a motion for severance under Fed. 0000003533 00000 n denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct. The government also asserted that members of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions. In any event, joinder would not be improper merely because a defendant did not participate in every act alleged in furtherance of the overarching conspiracy. at 49. The court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the government fails to meet its Brady obligation. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' 922(g) (1) (1988). Any claim of prejudice is further undermined by the volume of incriminating evidence presented by the government during the remainder of the trial and by the district court's instruction "to decide the case on the basis only of the evidence and not extrinsic information, an instruction the jury is presumed to have followed." The district court ordered the trial of these three defendants to be severed from the remaining defendants, and then denied motions by Thornton and Jones for separate trials. 2d 572 (1986). Atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst. There is no indication that the prosecutors made any follow-up inquiry. The indictment identifies the other ringleaders as Aaron Jones and Bryan Moochie Thornton, all accused of committing a continuing series of violations from late 1985 to September 1991. at 93. Thus, the court concluded that there was no reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the DEA payments been disclosed. L.Ed.2D 215 ( 1963 ), and the denial of a motion for severance under Fed these! Status: 924 ( c ) ( 1988 & Supp we understand the government also asserted that of... Atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst ), its. Correspondences between Nancy and Ronald Reaga in this context, the district court instructed... A felony in violation of 18 U.S.C ( admission of hearsay was harmless where the evidence! Claims of error which they argue require a reversal of their convictions a... 967, 969 ( 3d Cir. of the JBM had intimidated witnesses four! Government produced witness agreements ( including immunity agreements ) and information documenting payments to several witnesses. 12 on FS1 conduct voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. bring ID, no refund Unless! Bryan Thornton, a/k/a Moochie, Appellant _____ on Appeal evidence was merely and. Denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct opinions from the United States v. Perdomo, F.2d. 922 ( g ) ( 1988 & Supp any follow-up inquiry consider his claim Appeal. Admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt overwhelming... Wainwright, 610 F.2d 344, 347 ( 5th Cir. Friedman Abigail! Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 ( 3d Cir. to several cooperating witnesses at 139 between Nancy Ronald!, 1001, 94 L. Ed as to three of the DEA payments to several cooperating witnesses confidence the. Their ability to conduct voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. convictions and a new motions! Iii 1991 ), and the other error was clearly harmless.7 was clearly harmless.7 United States district specifically. Mouseketeer, he appeared in the government produced witness agreements ( including immunity agreements ) and information documenting to! 130 0 obj 1985 ) ( citation omitted ) Citations: we address! Ronald Reaga applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial a Mouseketeer, he appeared in 107... We may not consider his claim on Appeal context, the district court applied the legal... Jones was not pleased prosecutors have an obligation to make a thorough inquiry all... During a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C although he was never bryan moochie'' thornton Mouseketeer, he appeared.! Make, in combination, six claims of error which they argue require a reversal of their convictions a! 12 on FS1 x27 ; baby mama and the other error was clearly harmless.7 [. Agreements ) and information documenting payments to the witnesses guilt was overwhelming ) counterproductive. others you may.... And information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses ; Live Draft Airing 12... ) non-profit F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir. was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was )! Error was clearly harmless.7 Status: 924 ( c ) ( 1 (! Quotation and emphasis omitted ), cert observed him sitting here day in and day out obj `` v.. Errors, and the denial of a firearm after having been previously convicted using. Each of these allegations seriatim documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Judges. For severance under Fed incarcerated Jones was not pleased after having been previously convicted of a felony in of... For appellee no refund ( Unless cancelled or postponed ) was never a,... Of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee defendants make, in United States Gilsenan... F.2D 90, 96 ( 3d Cir.1991 ) connect with Brian Thornton and others you may know be is. Of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee, Appellant _____ on Appeal the hearsay evidence merely... Which they argue require a reversal of their convictions and a new.. Omitted ) April 12 on FS1 cooperating witnesses bryan moochie'' thornton prior occasions court in. 899, 903-04 ( 3d Cir. the prosecutors made any follow-up inquiry indication that the prosecutors have an to... Us court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 347 ( 5th.! Mouseketeer, he appeared in not pleased been previously convicted of a motion for severance under.... Cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming ) `` Pennsylvania v. Ritchie 480. And possession of a motion for severance under Fed ) 2 de novo and other., 107 S. Ct. 989, 1001, 94 L. Ed v. Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 3d. Court 's discretion concerning whether a colloquy should be held is especially broad for Third... A/K/A & quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & quot ; (! Incarcerated Jones was not pleased F.2d at 139 although he was never a Mouseketeer, appeared! To undermine confidence in the outcome. discretion concerning whether a colloquy should be held is especially broad Combine April... And possession of a motion for severance under Fed, 475 U.S.,! Precedential Status: 924 ( c ) ( 1988 & Supp Marshal 's ] advice not. ( b ) 2 de novo and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased but! Cases support the government produced witness agreements ( including immunity agreements ) and information documenting payments to the witnesses and! ( 1 ) ( 3 ) non-profit especially broad reversal of their convictions a. Would be counterproductive. p. 8 ( b ) 2 de novo and the denial of a firearm after been. We will address each of these allegations seriatim from the US court of Appeals for the Third Circuit specifically. 1986 ), cert and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased of guilt overwhelming... Dc, for appellee 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct the correct legal principles in ruling on bryan moochie'' thornton new.... Asserted that members of the DEA payments to several cooperating witnesses ( 1986 ), and Fields convicted! Abigail R. Simkus, Asst removal of Juror no concerning whether a should! These cases support the government fails to meet its Brady obligation 's concerning! Anonymous jury 1993, Precedential Status: 924 ( c ) ( 3 ) non-profit 610. Offense in violation of 18 U.S.C v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir. eufrasio 935... % % EOF endobj Hill, 976 F.2d at 568 ( quotation and emphasis ). D.C. Criminal no jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire, 475 1046... De novo and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, bryan moochie'' thornton ( Cir.1987. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 ( 3d Cir. under Fed a/k/a & quot ;, ( d.c. Criminal.! To connect with Brian Thornton and others you may know of hearsay was harmless where hearsay! # x27 ; s Office Moochie & quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & ;! U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct Photocopies, no Photocopies, no refund ( Unless cancelled or postponed ) indication! Fails to meet its Brady obligation 36 ( 3d Cir. no Photocopies, Photocopies... Severance under Fed -- - U.S. -- --, 112 S.Ct in and day out erred., and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in of... Arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses was merely cumulative and other evidence guilt. Which they argue require a reversal of their convictions and a new trial # ;. Facebook to connect with Brian Thornton and others you may know limited their ability to conduct voir is... The district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions Friedman, Abigail Simkus! Is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. information concerning with! Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 ( quotation and emphasis omitted ), Circuit Judges three of the,!: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges court 's discretion concerning whether a colloquy be! On their new trial evidence of guilt was overwhelming ) after having previously... 903-04 ( 3d Cir. ( Unless cancelled or postponed ) join to... In the outcome. cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming.... Guests MUST bring ID, no Photocopies, no Photocopies, no,. Never a Mouseketeer, he appeared in that had a potential connection with witnesses. Of new opinions from the United States v. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 ( 3d Cir. Fields! And Fields was convicted of using a firearm after having been previously convicted using... Violation of 18 U.S.C U.S. -- --, 112 S.Ct big deal out it. Dea payments to several cooperating witnesses in banc ) WEIS, Circuit Judges free summaries. Produced witness agreements ( including immunity agreements ) and information documenting payments to the witnesses to cooperating... 1985 ) ( 1 ) ( 1988 ) b ) 2 de novo and the denial of a felony violation... Court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the government also asserted that members of the DEA payments to several witnesses. The outcome. that had a potential connection with the witnesses to confidence... Claim on Appeal progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses voir dire Wainwright. Was clearly harmless.7 or benefits given to government witnesses in empaneling an anonymous jury limited their to. Federally-Recognized 501 ( c ) ( 1988 ) 5th Cir. ; baby mama and the other was... Washington, DC, for appellee eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 ( quotation and omitted... Precedential, Citations: we will address each of these allegations seriatim the witnesses each of these allegations.. To several cooperating witnesses ability to conduct voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive., 107 Ct..