18 U.S.C. § 3432
Indictment and list of jurors and witnesses for prisoner in capital cases
A person charged with treason or other capital offense shall at least three entire days before commencement of trial, excluding intermediate weekends and holidays, be furnished with a copy of the indictment and a list of the veniremen, and of the witnesses to be produced on the trial for proving the indictment, stating the place of abode of each venireman and witness, except that such list of the veniremen and witnesses need not be furnished if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that providing the list may jeopardize the life or safety of any person.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 176
cases, 1952–2019 · leading case: United States v. Honken, 378 F. Supp. 2d 880 (N.D. Iowa 2004).
United States v. Honken, 378 F. Supp. 2d 880 (N.D. Iowa 2004). “He also contends that 18 U.S.C. § 3432 demonstrates Congress’s recognition that, even in a capital case, a defendant is entitled to know the identity of the people who will determine his guilt or innocence.”
United States v. Edelin, 128 F. Supp. 2d 23 (D.D.C. 2001). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3432 (allowing the Court to delay the production of witness names when it is shown to a preponderance of the evidence that the safety of any person may be jeopardized).”
United States v. James Dinkins, 691 F.3d 358 (4th Cir. 2012). “” 18 U.S.C. § 3432 (Section 3432). We draw upon persuasive precedent from our sister circuits, which already have developed principles guiding the empanelment of anonymous juries, in our resolution of this context-specific inquiry.”
United States v. Chadrick Evan Fulks, 454 F.3d 410 (4th Cir. 2006). “On May 10, 2004, the prosecution, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3432 , provided Fulks with a list of the names and addresses of 181 potential trial witnesses.”
Commonwealth v. Angiulo, 615 N.E.2d 155 (Mass. 1993). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3432 ." United States v. Scarfo, 850 F.”
United States v. Ruiz, 536 U.S. 622 (2002). “, 18 U. S. C. § 3432 (witness list disclosure required in capital cases three days before trial with exceptions); § 3500 (Government witness statements ordinarily subject to discovery only after testimony given); Fed.”
United States v. Young, 533 F.3d 453 (6th Cir. 2008). “When Young objected to the introduction of any evidence from the nineteen witnesses, the district court sua sponte invoked 18 U.S.C. § 3432 , which requires the government to provide a capital defendant with a witness list at least three days before the start of trial, as…”
United States v. Lujan, 530 F. Supp. 2d 1224 (D.N.M. 2008). “18 U.S.C. § 3432 18 U.S.C. § 3432 provides that a capital defendant must “at least three entire days before commencement of trial be furnished with a copy of the indictment and a list of the veniremen, and of the witnesses to be produced on the trial for proving the indictment,…”
United States v. Daniel Lewis Lee, Also Known as Daniel Lewis Graham, Also Known as D L Graham, Also Known as Danny Lee, 374 F.3d 637 (8th Cir. 2004). “In February 1999, the district court granted the government’s request to delay the mandatory disclosure of witness names under 18 U.S.C. § 3432 . The district court also denied several motions by Lee and Kehoe.”
United States v. Sampson, 335 F. Supp. 2d 166 (D. Mass. 2004). “These include: (1) a clarification of the procedural protections concerning jury selection afforded the defendant in a capital case under 18 U.S.C. § 3432 ; (2) evidentiary rulings applying the standard set forth in 18 U.”
United States v. Daniel Mathis, 932 F.3d 242 (4th Cir. 2019). “at 372 (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3432 ). We choose to apply this strict standard to both the capital defendants and the non-capital defendants, because the test is satisfied for both groups.”
United States v. Barrett, 496 F.3d 1079 (10th Cir. 2007). “In support of this contention, Barrett points to 18 U.S.C. § 3432 , and argues that the timing of the government’s production of the seven witness names was in violation of this statute.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.