LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

UNITED STATES v DANIELS Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: USVD120111, CourtName: US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Plaintiff: UNITED STATES, State: LA Louisiana, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>USVD120111, Sayes, United States, District Court, Jackson, Prison, Beating, Prison Investigators, Indictment, Fbi, Cir, Grand Jury, Appeals, Craft, Instruction, Interviews, Testimony, Compelled Statements, Rayfield Jackson, Government, Fbi Agent, Amendment, Supplemental Instruction, Prosecutors, Independent Sources, Medical Care, Prosecution Team, Discretion, Excessive Force, Immunized Testimony , ContentID: 120249295

Case Documents
1   APPELLLANT BRIEF
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 121327
54 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 1 document , 54 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . APPELLLANT BRIEF

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT
JACKSON
PRISON
BEATING
PRISON INVESTIGATORS
INDICTMENT
FBI
CIR
GRAND JURY
APPEALS
CRAFT
DEFENDANTS
INSTRUCTION
INTERVIEWS
TESTIMONY
COMPELLED STATEMENTS
RAYFIELD JACKSON
GOVERNMENT
FBI AGENT
AMENDMENT
SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION
PROSECUTORS
INDEPENDENT SOURCES
MEDICAL CARE
PROSECUTION TEAM
DISCRETION
EXCESSIVE FORCE
IMMUNIZED TESTIMONY
                No. 00-30624
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                  ___________________

                         UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                               Plaintiff-Appellee

                                                         v.

                                  HARRISON DANIELS;
                                    PATRICK SAYES;
                                          JOHN SWAN,

                                                               Defendants-Appellants
                                   _________________

        ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                 FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
                                   _________________

               BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE
                                   _________________


BRIAN JACKSON                                                  WILLIAM R. YEOMANS
  United States Attorney                                         Acting Assistant Attorney General

FREDERICK A. MENNER                                            JESSICA DUNSAY SILVER
  Assistant United States Attorney                             GREGORY B. FRIEL
                                                                 Attorneys
                                                                 Department of Justice
                                                                 P.O. Box 66078
                                                                 Washington, D.C.  20035-6078
                                                                 (202) 514-3876



                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                   

STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

STATEMENT OF ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
  • ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • The Beating Of Rayfield Jackson And The Denial Of
  • Medical Care
  • The Prison Investigation And The Statements By Sayes.
  • The FBI Investigation.
  • E. The Second Indictment.
  • TO THE GRAND JURY WAS DERIVED FROM
  • PATRICK SAYES' COMPELLED STATEMENTS
  • FBI Agent Craft Did Not Use Sayes' Statements
  • Even If Craft's Interviews Were Tainted,
  • Government Met Its Kastigar Burden
  • PROSECUTION TEAM
  • Exposure Of Prosecutors To Compelled Statements
  • THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN DENYING DEFENDANTS'
  • THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT PLAINLY ERR OR ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN GIVING
  • "Excessive Force" Instruction.
  • EIGHTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION
  • 193 F.2d 294 (5th Cir.
  •    |