Where a defendant in a bank fraud case sought a recusal of the judge, while she was a U.S. Attorney the judge had no significant personal involvement in a critical decision regarding the defendant’s subsequent prosecution for mail fraud conspiracy, and the judge properly determined that the investigation and prosecution of the defendant’s conspiracy offense occurred after she was the U.S. Attorney, so there was no conflict of interest and recusal was not required, and the judgment is affirmed since the defendant also did not show that the sentence was substantively unreasonable.
Judgment is affirmed.
U.S. v. Norwood (MLW No. 70419/Case No. 15-3442 – 5 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Phillip, J. (Alex Scott McCauley, Overland Park, Kansas, argued for appellant) (Philip M. Koppe, Kansas City, Missouri, argued for appellee).