Explicit
The Opinion And Order Denying El Chapo's Appeal (Part 3) (8/3/24)
Aug 3, 2024 ·
11m 19s
Download and listen anywhere
Download your favorite episodes and enjoy them, wherever you are! Sign up or log in now to access offline listening.
Description
Case Overview: Joaquin Guzman, also known as "El Chapo," appealed his convictions on multiple charges, including engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise and other drug-related offenses. Guzman raised several issues...
show more
Case Overview:
Joaquin Guzman, also known as "El Chapo," appealed his convictions on multiple charges, including engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise and other drug-related offenses. Guzman raised several issues on appeal, challenging the fairness of his trial and the legality of his convictions.
Key Points of the Opinion:
(commercial at 7:10)
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
USCOURTS-ca2-19-02239-0.pdf (govinfo.gov)
show less
Joaquin Guzman, also known as "El Chapo," appealed his convictions on multiple charges, including engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise and other drug-related offenses. Guzman raised several issues on appeal, challenging the fairness of his trial and the legality of his convictions.
Key Points of the Opinion:
- Pretrial Publicity and Jury Impartiality:
- Guzman argued that the extensive pretrial publicity surrounding his case made it impossible to empanel an impartial jury.
- The court found that the trial judge took appropriate measures to ensure jury impartiality, including a thorough voir dire process and instructions to the jury to avoid media coverage.
- Confinement Conditions:
- Guzman contended that his pretrial confinement conditions were excessively harsh and violated his rights.
- The court held that the confinement conditions, while strict, were justified due to Guzman's history of prison escapes and the government's need to ensure security.
- Evidentiary Rulings:
- Guzman challenged several evidentiary rulings made by the trial court, claiming they were prejudicial.
- The appellate court reviewed these rulings and found no abuse of discretion by the trial judge. The evidence was deemed relevant and its probative value outweighed any prejudicial effect.
- Juror Misconduct:
- Guzman alleged juror misconduct, citing claims that jurors had read media reports about the case during the trial.
- The court found no credible evidence of juror misconduct that would warrant a new trial. The trial judge's instructions to the jury and the lack of verified incidents supported this conclusion.
- Sufficiency of the Evidence:
- Guzman argued that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions.
- The court concluded that the evidence, including testimony from numerous cooperating witnesses and physical evidence, was more than sufficient to support the jury's verdicts.
- Sentencing:
- Guzman also challenged his sentence as being excessively harsh.
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court's sentencing decision, noting the severity of Guzman's crimes and the extensive harm caused by his criminal enterprise.
(commercial at 7:10)
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
USCOURTS-ca2-19-02239-0.pdf (govinfo.gov)
Information
| Author | Bobby Capucci |
| Organization | Bobby Capucci |
| Website | - |
| Tags |
Copyright 2024 - Spreaker Inc. an iHeartMedia Company
