U.S. v. Dickey

In prosecution on wire fraud and unlawful use of forced labor charges arising out of defendant’s scheme to recruit religious followers and then force them to work multiple full-time job and then give defendant all of their wages, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s fourth motion to continue trial made by one of his substitute counsel. Instant continuance motion came at end of 2.5 year period of trial preparation, and after substitute counsel took defendant’s case with explicit understanding that he would have four months to prepare for case. Moreover, defendant failed to establish any prejudice, where defendant was able to retain expert, and where counsel met with defendant and developed cogent defense. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in refusing defendant’s proposed jury instruction that told jury not to consider way in which defendant exercised or practiced her religion when determining question of guilt, where proposed instruction was not accurate statement of law because it would have excused her criminal conduct based on her religious assertions. Too, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in calculating restitution by relying on opinion of expert, who determined costs to treat victims, who suffered from PTSD arising out of defendant’s conduct, by calculating costs as overall group of victims, as opposed to making individual assessment of each victim.