United States v. Stinson; United States v. Griffin, No. 07-50408 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendants, John Stinson and Robert Griffin, appealed their convictions for crimes related to their membership in the Aryan Brotherhood (AB) prison gang. This appeal centered on numerous procedural decisions by the district court before and during trial. The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to dismiss for improper venue; the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Griffin's motion to sever; the district court did not err in proceeding with a death qualified jury; the district court did not clearly err in rejecting the two Batson challenges; the district court did not err in supervising discovery because the government did not redact Brady material and the district court was not required to review unredacted documents in camera; the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the order granting Griffin's habeas petition; even if the government elicited vouching testimony, it was harmless in light of the strength of its case; the prosecutorial misconduct in posing hypotheticals concerning debriefs not in evidence was harmless in light of jury instructions and an otherwise strong government case; the district court did not err in its jury instructions; the district court did not err in declining to instruct the jurors that Ricky Rose had been a potential government witness; the partial read backs of testimony without precautions, such as an admonition, did not affect defendants' substantial rights in light of other evidence presented and therefore did not warrant reversal; and the district court operated well within its discretion when it chose the wording of the special verdict form on withdrawal. Accordingly, the court affirmed defendants' convictions.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on August 26, 2011.
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.