United States v. Clay, No. 12-2893 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion for post-conviction relief, arguing that the district court used an incorrect standard to evaluate the effect of the Government's alleged use of perjured testimony during his underlying trial for wire fraud and money laundering. Defendant was a licensed attorney, a licensed real estate agent and broker, as well as a licensed contractor. He was convicted of charges related to his involvement in a scheme to defraud purchasers of five residential properties. The court held that a false testimony claim fell within the category of trial error, rather than structural error. Applying the harmless-error standard and assuming that the testimony at issue was false and the Government knew or should have known of its falsity, the challenged testimony at issue did not produce a substantial or injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's denial of the section 2255 motion.
Court Description: Prisoner case - habeas. Assuming, without deciding that the Government used perjured testimony in obtaining Clay's conviction and knew or should have know it was perjured, his allegation of error is an allegation of a trial error and not a structural error and must be evaluated under the harmless-error standard; applying the harmless-error standard, the claimed false testimony could not have actually prejudiced the jury's verdict in light of the overall strength of the government's case and the fact that the witness was thoroughly impeached at trial
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.