United States v. Ortland, 109 F. 3d 539 (9th Cir. 1997) is an interesting case about consciousness of guilt. The Court affirmed a conviction for mail fraud. The Court found no error in the exclusion of evidence offered by the defendant that one of his business partners had fled prosecution.
The Court had already rejected the idea that a co-defendant's flight is relevant to show the guilt of anyone other than the fleeing defendant in United States v. Candoli, 870 F. 2d 496, 501 (9th Cir. 1989). Similarly, flight does not tend to show that someone else is innocent, at least where there can easily be more than one guilty person, as in this case.
GREGORY CHANDLER, Attorney at Law
No comments:
Post a Comment