United States v. George A. Vallejo

How courts have described this case

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

• setting forth standard for prevailing upon a Rule 33 motion based on a Brady violation
• noting that, on appellate review of a motion to dismiss for violation of double jeopardy, the reviewing court “review[s] the district court’s factual finding[s] for clear error” and that the district court’s “determination of the prosecutor’s intent is a finding of fact[]”
• noting that to es- tablish a Brady violation, a defendant must show “there is a USCA11 Case: 18-10508 Date Filed: 10/18/2022 Page: 4 of 7 4 Opinion of the Court 18-10508, 20-12102 reasonable probability that the outcome would have been differ- ent”
• using the same standard to evaluate a Rule 33 motion based on alleged violations of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)
• applying abuse-of-discretion standard to motion for new trial based on Brady material
• reviewing a district court’s denial of a Rule 33 motion for a new trial, including those where the motion is based on a Brady or Giglio violation or newly discovered evidence, for an abuse of discretion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).