United States v. Fell, 072018 FED2, 17-1991-cr
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DONALD FELL Defendant-Appellee.|
|Attorney:||APPEARING FOR APPELLANT: WILLIAM B. DARROW, Gregory L. Waples, Assistant United States Attorneys, for Christina E. Nolan, United States Attorney for the District of Vermont, Burlington, VT. APPEARING FOR APPELLEE: MICHAEL BURT, San Francisco, CA; John Philipsborn, San Francisco, CA; Cathleen Pric...|
|Judge Panel:||PRESENT: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., JOSE A. CABRANES, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||July 20, 2018|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT'S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION "SUMMARY ORDER"). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 20th day of July, two thousand seventeen.
Appeal from a ruling of the United States District Court for the District of Vermont (Geoffrey W. Crawford, Judge).
APPEARING FOR APPELLANT: WILLIAM B. DARROW, Gregory L. Waples, Assistant United States Attorneys, for Christina E. Nolan, United States Attorney for the District of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
APPEARING FOR APPELLEE: MICHAEL BURT, San Francisco, CA; John Philipsborn, San Francisco, CA; Cathleen Price, New York, NY.
PRESENT: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., JOSE A. CABRANES, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judges.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the district court's May 1, 2017 order denying the government's Motion in limine for Admission of Deceased Coconspirator Robert Lee's Statements and Letters is AFFIRMED, but on grounds different from those stated by the district court.
We are called on for the third time to resolve issues pertaining to the criminal prosecution of Defendant Donald Fell in relation to the killings of Charles Conway, Deborah Fell ("Debbie"), and Teresca King that took place the morning of November 27, 2000.1 In July 2014, Fell's conviction and death sentence following a jury trial in the District of Vermont were vacated pursuant to the district court's grant of Fell's habeas corpus petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v. Fell, 2014 WL 3697810 (D. Vt. July 24, 2014). The government did not appeal.
The government will re-try Fell and the parties have consented to a trifurcation of those proceedings pursuant to the Federal Death Penalty Act ("FDPA"), 18 U.S.C. §§ 3591 et seq. First, the jury will assess Fell's guilt on the indicted charges. Second, if Fell is found guilty, the jury will determine if Fell is eligible for a death-sentence pursuant to the terms of the FDPA. To find Fell death-eligible, the jury need find the existence beyond a reasonable doubt of at least one aggravating factor enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3592(c) for which Fell was provided pre-trial notice, 18 U.S.C. § 3593(a)(1), (2). See also 18 U.S.C. §§...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP