Legal Opinion
United States v. Rouse
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided February 10, 2004No. CR 94-40015PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
PIERSOL, Chief Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Motion for New Trial pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. (Doc. 428.) The motion was filed by defendants Desmond Rouse, Jesse Rouse, Garfield Feather and Russell Hubbeling. For the following reasons, the motion will be denied.
BACKGROUND
In August of 1994, defendants were convicted by a jury on charges of aggravated sexual abuse involving five young girls in their extended family aged 20 month to seven years in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2241(c). After the Court imposed sentence, the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Strickler v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Garfield Feather v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2021
- Desmond Rouse v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2021
- Feather v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2020
- Rouse v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2020
- United States v. DuprisDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2006