Скачать или смотреть United States v. DiNapoli Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 36,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

United States v. DiNapoli | 8 F.3d 909 (1993)

A member of the mafia is found guilty of racketeering, so his lawyers mobbed the courts with appeals over a rule of evidence in United States versus DiNapoli.

Federal authorities investigated several construction companies and members of the mafia from the Genovese Family. Authorities believed these groups formed a club and rigged bids for construction projects in Manhattan in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO. Many were indicted, including Vincent DiNapoli.

A grand jury convened to investigate. Frederick DeMatteis and Pasquale Bruno testified. Though they received immunity, both denied the clubs existed. The prosecution didn’t want to disclose certain evidence during the grand-jury investigation but used a previously disclosed recording of a conversation to cross-examine the witnesses. On a break, jurors told the prosecutor that they didn’t think Bruno had been honest. The prosecutor shared this with Bruno when he returned.

At trial, DiNapoli wanted to call DeMatteis and Bruno as witnesses, but both took the Fifth and refused to testify. DiNapoli asked the court to admit the affidavits that the witnesses provided during the grand-jury investigation, citing Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1). The district judge refused to admit the affidavits because the prosecutor’s motives in the investigation and trial weren’t similar, a requirement to admit evidence through this rule. The jury found DiNapoli guilty.

DiNapoli wanted a new trial and argued that the court should’ve admitted the affidavits. The parties fought the issue all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court discussed the similar-motive requirement and remanded to a lower court. A panel of judges for the Second Circuit held that the affidavits met the requirement and should’ve been admitted. The prosecution moved for reconsideration. All the judges for the Second Circuit addressed the motion.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-...

The Quimbee App features over 36,700 case briefs keyed to 984 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-...

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_...

Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom  

Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom  

#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries