78 F.3d 294 (7th Cir. 1996)
Defendants, who were convicted of racketeering activities, contended on appeal that the district court erred in denying their request for an evidentiary hearing on alleged governmental misconduct that arose from a tape recording of one defendant's conversation with his lawyer in a room at the correctional center.
- The court found that the district court did not abuse its discretion because defendants failed to respond to the government's supporting affidavits that no misconduct occurred.
- Further, the district court correctly denied defendants' request for the jurors' names and addresses because of the real fear of the intimidation that defendants could exert on the jury overrode their right to the information that was also denied to the government.
- The court noted that the district court's interview of jurors after their verdict was properly limited to whether jurors had acquitted one defendant of one or both counts of conspiracy to commit murder; further inquiry would have gone too far.
- The court found merit in one defendant's complaint that his sentence included an improper punishment bonus based on unconvicted, unstipulated crimes.
The court affirmed defendants' convictions. The court remanded one defendant's case for resentencing with an intimation that other grounds might exist for an upward departure.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.