Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s motion under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33(b)(1) for new trial on Clean Air Act charges stemming from his improper removal of asbestos from building, where defendant claimed that he had obtained new evidence (that had been withheld from him), which discredited key govt. witness. Defendant claimed that newly discovered evidence established that witness had cooperated with federal authorities investigating said witness on unrelated criminal matter, and that said witness had steered defendant into violating Clean Air Act unintentionally. While Dist. Ct. believed that defendant's claims could only be addressed in habeas petition, Ct. of Appeals found that post-trial motions based on newly discovered evidence that invoke constitutional theories can be addressed under either Rule 33(b)(1) or habeas petition, and that defendant should have been allowed to pursue his relief under instant motion.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Criminal Procedure