Narrative Opinion Summary
This case involves a sixteen-count indictment against a corporation and two individual defendants, alleging violations of RICO, interstate transportation of stolen property, and criminal copyright infringements. After a protracted trial, the court acquitted certain counts against all defendants due to insufficient evidence, while the jury convicted the corporation and one individual on specific counts. Defendants sought acquittal or a new trial, arguing prosecutorial misconduct and improper influence on the jury. The court upheld the convictions based on sufficient evidence but granted a new trial due to concerns over the prejudicial impact of a RICO charge, false testimony, and prosecutorial failures to rectify these issues. The court criticized the government's reliance on unsupported RICO allegations and mishandling of evidence, emphasizing the need for justice free from prejudicial influence. The decision also addressed concerns about jury instructions on copyright validity, underscoring the discretionary role of the jury in weighing evidence. Consequently, the motion for a new trial was granted, excluding the unsupported RICO allegations, to ensure a fair assessment of the evidence and justice for the defendants.
Legal Issues Addressed
Dismissal of Charges under Rule 29subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court granted a judgment of acquittal on several counts due to insufficient evidence against certain defendants.
Reasoning: The court granted a judgment of acquittal on several counts against both Sam Goody, Inc. and Stolon, as well as all counts against Levy, due to insufficient evidence.
Evidentiary Weight of Copyright Registration Certificatessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court clarified that registration certificates are prima facie evidence, but do not conclusively establish copyright validity, leaving the jury discretion.
Reasoning: The defendants contest the jury instructions regarding copyright validity, claiming they imply the registration certificates are conclusive evidence.
Motion for New Trial under Rule 33subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A new trial was granted due to concerns of jury influence by improper conduct, including false testimony and prosecutorial misconduct.
Reasoning: The court granted the motion for a new trial based on concerns that the jury may have been improperly influenced by the RICO allegations, false testimony from a government agent, and the prosecutor's failure to correct this testimony.
Prosecutorial Duty to Correct False Testimonysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The failure of the prosecutor to promptly correct false testimony contributed to granting a new trial.
Reasoning: The prosecutor had an obligation to promptly correct the false testimony but did not do so until the court intervened, which limited the jury's ability to fully grasp the significance of the truth.
RICO Charges and Prejudicial Impactsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the RICO charge may have significantly prejudiced the jury, warranting a new trial in the interest of justice.
Reasoning: Concerns have been raised regarding the government's use of a RICO charge that lacks sufficient support... the potential prejudicial impact of the RICO charge on the jury's deliberations is significant.