United States v. Musk, No. 12-3320 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction on three counts of wire fraud, asserting that his cross-examination testimony was improperly compelled. The court affirmed the judgment of the district court, concluding that defendant initially made a knowing waiver of the Fifth Amendment; the district court properly ruled that the questions at issue were within the proper scope; and the court rejected defendant's contention that his testimony was improperly compelled because the district court threatened him with economic sanctions.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal case. The district court's decision as to whether a witness has a valid claim for exercising the Fifth Amendment privilege is highly fact-intensive and is reviewed for an abuse of discretion; here, defendant made a knowing waiver of the Fifth Amendment and the objected-to cross-examination was within the scope of his testimony on direct and re-direct; claim that the district court improperly compelled defendant's testimony by threatening him with economic sanctions (the costs of a mistrial) rejected.
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.