United States of America v. Linette Perez

Filed February 12, 2002
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Nos. 00-5237, 00-5238, 00-5261
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
LINETTE PEREZ, Appellant in No. 00-5237
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JUANCHO ALCANTERA, Appellant in No. 00-5238
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
EDMUNDO BATOON, Appellant in No. 00-5216
Consolidated Appeals From the
United States District Court
For the District of New Jersey
(D.C. Crim. No. 99-cr-00100-3, No. 99-cr-00100-4 and
No. 99-00100-6)
District Judge: Honorable John W. Bissell
Argued: December 12, 2000
Before: SCIRICA, AMBRO, Circuit Judges, and
POLLAK, District Judge*
_________________________________________________________________
* The Honorable Louis H. Pollak, Senior District Judge for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.
ORDER AMENDING SLIP OPINION
It is now ordered that the Slip Opinion in the above case
filed February 4, 2002, be amended as follows:
On Page 23, Footnote 13 should read in full:
This begs the question of what happens if the
Government alleged facially valid venue in the
indictment but offered no testimony at trial proving
venue. If no defense objection is raised at or before the
close of the Government’s case-in-chief, Sandini and
Polin instruct that, notwithstanding the lack of
prosecution testimony, the venue defense is waived.
Sandini, 803 F.2d at 127; Polin, 323 F.2d at 557.

-- 1 of 2 --

A related question is what happens when facially
valid venue is alleged in the indictment, the
Government presents no evidence on venue during its
case-in-chief, and the defense objects at the close of
the Government’s case. In that case the District Court
has the discretion to allow the Government to reopen
its case. This "give[s] the government an opportunity
. . . to provide additional proof, if possible, to cure an
insufficient presentation on venue." Turley , 891 F.2d at
61.
By the Court,
/s/Thomas L. Ambro
Circuit Judge
Dated: February 12, 2002
A True Copy:
Teste:
Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
2

-- 2 of 2 --