United States v. Green, No. 12-1442 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. On appeal, defendant alleged that the district court erred in allowing a trial witness to be advised by an attorney who had previously represented defendant in the early stages of the case. The court concluded that defendant incorrectly asserted that the per se rule of reversal was applicable to this case. While it may have been a better practice to have the witness advised by an attorney who had never represented defendant, such error, if it was one, was neither clear nor obvious under current law. Therefore, the district court did not plainly abuse its discretion. Defendant also failed to demonstrate any prejudice. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Criminal Case - conviction. District court did not clearly err in failing to recognize and remedy appointment of attorney for witness who had previously represented the defendant. Defendant failed to object, per se rule of reversal does not apply, defendant did not show witness's interest was materially adverse to defendant's interest, and defendant failed to demonstrate any error affected substantial rights or fairness, integrity or public reputation of the judicial proceedings.
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.