United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Thomas L. Waugh, Defendant-appellant, 19 F.3d 1444 (10th Cir. 1994)
Annotate this CaseBefore ANDERSON, McWILLIAMS and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT1
Mr. Waugh appeals the denial of his motion for a new trial based on the government's failure to disclose material evidence pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). The district court found neither exculpatory nor impeachment evidence in its in camera review of the documents supporting the FDIC's complaint against John A. Baker. Mr. Baker was the government's chief witness in Mr. Waugh's criminal trial held six months before the filing of the FDIC's complaint. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291.
We review such a claim de novo. United States v. Rogers, 960 F.2d 1501, 1510 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 817 (1992). After careful examination of the voluminous materials reviewed by the district court, we agree that they contain neither exculpatory nor impeachment evidence. As a result, we need not address Mr. Waugh's subsequent arguments.
AFFIRMED.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of the court's General Order. 151 F.R.D. 470 (10th Cir. 1993)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
