How Pubic is the Law: Part 11

Continuing in commentary about the MSBA listserv, I noticed that at a point where I was actively utilizing (to my clients’ advantage) pdf-type cases distributed by the MSBA, all of a sudden the MSBA changed to providing a link, instead of attaching a case.  Here’s an example of such an email, sent Tue 12/11/2012 10:34 AM (I cannot explain the wierd electronic stuff at the bottom).

This was what was available at the link.  I don’t think this is a real pdf.  Like another post I filed, the document bears a number like it was created by a scan-making machine.  That leaves this opinion open to the concern that someone received the order in docx or .rft format, and could have made changed.  It really doesn’t matter if they did or not.  The mere fact that they could (and perhaps the temptation would be there especially with “high profile” cases), is enough.

I we don’t have integrity in the text of court orders, nothing we are doing makes any sense.



United States  v.  Jeraldon Green
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-1442
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
[PUBLISHED] [Chief Judge Riley, Author, with Wollman and Melloy, Circuit Judges] 

Court's syllabus: 

Criminal Case - conviction. District court did not clearly err in failing to
recognize and remedy appointment of attorney for witness who had
previously represented the defendant. Defendant failed to object, per se
rule of reversal does not apply, defendant did not show witness's interest
was materially adverse to defendant's interest, and defendant failed to
demonstrate any error affected substantial rights or fairness, integrity or
public reputation of the judicial proceedings.
Court Opinions by email 
An MSBA member service


You are subscribed to msba-fedcrim as:  You can unsubscribe by sending a blank email to