United States v. Earle

113 F.3d 796 (8th Cir. 1997)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

A grand jury indicted Earles (D) and Papajohn (D1) for the burning of the Countryside IGA. The indictment also alleged that they had devised a scheme to defraud an insurance company, laundering the proceeds received and conspiring to commit mail fraud and money laundering. D’s son, Donnie, testified before the grand jury three times. The first time he stated that he did not know who burned down the IGA but that he would not put it past Ds. At his second appearance, he admitted to knowing more facts and testified in great detail. At his third appearance, he stated he would not comment further. At trial, Donnie refused to testify and asserted his privilege against self-incrimination. He claimed the privilege despite the grant of use immunity and the explanation by the court that such immunity rendered his Fifth Amendment claim unavailing. Donnie stated that he did not want to testify against his father or D1. Donnie was held in contempt and jailed. After a continuance, the court explained that a mistrial would be granted if D1 agreed to be tried with D. D1 agreed, and the court declared a mistrial. At the next trial, Donnie again refused to testify. The court declared Donnie an unavailable witness and allowed the government to read redacted portions of his grand jury testimony. Ds objected. The local sheriff then testified and placed the parties at the scene of the crime from their suspicious activity on the night of the fire. The government also presented fire investigators who concluded that arson was the cause. The government also presented evidence that D1 had financial difficulties and was behind in payments on the IGA inventory. Evidence also showed that insurance claim was processed through the mail and that D1 got checks for $188,665 in the mail. D was convicted of arson and aiding and abetting mail fraud and conspiracy. D1 was convicted of aiding and abetting arson, mail fraud, and conspiracy. Ds moved for a judgment of acquittal or a new trial. They contended that the district court erred in allowing in Donnie’s grand jury testimony. Judgment of acquittal was entered. The government appealed.