Criminal Law : Ineffective Assistance – Exculpatory Emails – Prosecutorial Misconduct

(1)Where a defendant who was convicted of attempted commercial sex trafficking argued that his counsel was ineffective for not trying to admit allegedly exculpatory emails, it was not apparent that the emails would have been admissible, so the appellate court declined to review the claim, and the defendant did not provide any evidence to evaluate the probative value of the emails, so the district court’s exclusion is affirmed.

(2)Where a defendant who was convicted of attempted commercial sex trafficking argued that the prosecutor misstated the law of entrapment by equating persuasion with force, the improper statements did not warrant a new trial under plain-error review since the jury instructions were correct and the evidence did not show that the defendant was persuaded or talked into the crime.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Golliher (MLW No. 69109/Case No. 15-1586 – 13 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8^th Circuit, Smith, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Schreier, J. (Jeffrey Robert Connolly, Rapid City, South Dakota, argued for appellant; Brian L Gardner and Michael S. Weinstein appeared on the brief) (Kevin Koliner, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, argued for appellee).

Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)