Legal Opinion

United States v. Daugerdas

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 3, 2013No. S3 09 Cr. 581 (WHP)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

WILLIAM H. PAULEY III, District Judge:

Defendant David Parse (“Parse”) moves pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33(a) for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Parse argues that his lawyers’ conduct in failing to disclose information they possessed about Catherine Conrad, Juror No. 1, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. For the following reasons, Parse’s motion for a new trial is denied.

BACKGROUND

At the conclusion of a three-month trial, a jury convicted Parse of one count of corruptly obstructing and impeding the *495due administration of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  5. Rompilla v. BeardSupreme Court of the United States · 2005

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Polanco v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2025
  2. Scott v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2019
  3. Vilar v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API