U.S. v. Lunn

In prosecution on bank fraud charges, Dist. Ct. did not interfere with defendant’s presentation of his evidence/defense theory, even though defendant argued that Dist. Ct: (1) failed to allow him to present evidence concerning true purpose of Scott Pippen loan that, according to defendant, would have bolstered his defense to instant fraud charges; and (2) interfered with his testimony about his own understanding of his net worth. Record, though, showed that defendant was able to offer testimony about true purpose of Pippen loan. Moreover, fact regarding defendant’s net worth was not relevant to issue as to whether defendant had submitted loan applications containing false statements and forged signatures. Also, defendant was not denied fair trial, where he largely succeeded in being able to present testimony that he wished jury to hear, and where defendant’s proposed jury instruction regarding his good-faith when submitting instant loan applications was properly rejected as being redundant to other instructions given to jury.