United States v. Ronald Burns

Summary

The First Circuit reversed a drug conspiracy conviction, holding that the district court abused its discretion by denying a continuance sought to obtain a severed co-defendant's exculpatory testimony. The court applied the four-factor test from *United States v. Drougas* (bona fide need, substance of testimony, exculpatory nature, and likelihood of testimony) and found that the defendant met his burden, while the district court's countervailing concerns about judicial economy and speedy trial did not outweigh the deprivation of the defendant's only witness. Key topics: severance for co-defendant testimony, abuse of discretion in denying continuance, and balancing defendant's right to present exculpatory evidence against judicial economy.

Holdings

1. The district court abused its discretion in denying the continuance where the defendant had shown a bona fide need for the testimony, the substance and exculpatory nature of the testimony, and that the co-defendant would testify if severed, and the court failed to properly weigh the four factors from United States v. Drougas.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Burns's motion for continuance to secure the testimony of co-defendant Jay Hart after granting severance for that purpose.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded