United States v. Daniel P. Taglia and Robert J. McDonnell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a new trial would be warranted under Rule 33 if it were discovered after trial that the government’s star witness was “utterly unworthy of being believed because he had lied consistently in a string of previous cases”
• finding that newly discovered impeachment evidence can be enough where the conviction depends entirely on the uncorroborated 14 No. 06-3607 testimony of a single unreliable witness
• stating that “[i]f a motion is not acted upon, a litigant had better renew it. He may not lull the judge into thinking that it has been abandoned and then, after he has lost, pull a rabbit out of his pocket in the form of the forgotten motion.”
• discussing the options for raising an ineffective assistance claim and reminding defendant that “if he wants to support the claim with facts that require evidence to establish he will be well advised to wait till the postconviction stage and will be safe in doing so”
• evidentiary hearings are not required in § 2255 cases where there is no reason to suppose that a hearing would produce evidence justifying relief
• new evidence strongly suggested the conviction was based upon fabricated evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).