Free Proposed Voir Dire - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cr-02124-IEG

Document 27

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 JOHN C. ELLIS, JR. California State Bar No. 228083 2 FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF SAN DIEGO, INC. 225 Broadway, Suite 900 3 San Diego, CA 92101-5008 (619) 234-8467/Fax: (619) 687-2666 4 E-Mail: [email protected] 5 Attorneys for Juan Diego Emiliano Loya 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 TO: 17 18 KAREN P. HEWITT, INTERIM UNITED STATES ATTORNEY; AND DOUGLAS KEEHN, ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY: Juan Diego Emiliano Loya, by and through counsel, John C. Ellis, Jr., and Federal Defenders of San ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JUAN DIEGO EMILIANO LOYA, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ______________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 08CR2124-IEG DATE: TIME: September 3, 2008 9:00 a.m. PROPOSED VOIR DIRE (HONORABLE IRMA E. GONZALEZ)

DEFENDANT'S QUESTIONS

19 Diego, Inc., requests that the Court allow defense counsel to ask the jury the following questions. 20 Respectfully submitted, 21 22 DATE: September 2, 2008 23 24 25 26 27 28 /s/ John C. Ellis, Jr. JOHN C. ELLIS, JR. Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. Attorneys for Mr. Loya

Case 3:08-cr-02124-IEG

Document 27

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 1. 4 2. 5 3. 6 7 4. 8 9 5. 10 11 6. 12 7. 13 14 15 8. 16 9. 17 18 19 10. 20 21 11. 22 23 12. 24 25 13. 26 27 14. 28

I. PROPOSED QUESTIONS Do you feel that illegal immigration from Mexico is a problem? Why? Do you think that immigration laws are too lenient? Too harsh? Why? Mr. Loya is charged with a felony offense. You are not here to decide if Mr. Loya stays in the country. You're here to decide if he committed a crime. How do you feel about someone being charged with a felony for an immigration violation? Do you understand that Mr. Loya entered a not guilty plea and is therefore innocent unless proven otherwise? Do you have any difficulty presuming the defendant innocent now? What do you think about the presumption of innocence? The burden of proof is on the Government in this case. That means that Mr. Loya has no duty, none whatsoever, to prove anything in this case. Is there anybody who is uncomfortable with that idea, or thinks that it is not fair to the Government? Mr. Loya is presumed innocent unless and until the government proves that he is guilty. Does anyone not understand or not accept this principal? The burden on the government is called "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is higher than the standard used in civil cases - in fact, it is the highest legal standard. Knowing that you have to hold the government to its burden and that the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, does anyone feel this is unfair? Does anyone feel they would be unable to hold the government to this high burden? Has anyone ever worked for the Immigration and Naturalization Service or the Department of Homeland Security? Many of the government's witnesses will likely be law enforcement personnel. Is there anyone on the panel who might have trouble evaluating those witnesses' testimony the same as all other witnesses? Is there anyone who would tend to give more weight to the testimony simply because they are law enforcement personnel? Do you know of any other reason, or has anything occurred during this questioning period, that might make you doubtful as to whether you could be a completely fair and impartial juror in this case? If there is, it is now your duty to disclose this. How do you feel about our basic constitutional presumption that every person charged with a criminal offense is presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty? Would you have any difficulty applying this presumption? Do you understand and accept the principle that a defendant in a criminal case is not required to explain his or her side of the case since the burden of proof does, in fact, rest with the prosecution? Knowing now that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, would you find it necessary that Mr. Loya testify? If Mr. Loya chose to exercise his constitutional right not to testify, would you consider this to be any indication whatsoever of guilt? Have any of you at this time formed any opinion about the guilt or innocence of Mr. Loya that would require evidence to remove such opinion? 08CR2124-IEG

Case 3:08-cr-02124-IEG

Document 27

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 Dated: September 2, 2008 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

II. CONCLUSION Mr. Loya respectfully requests permission to ask the above questions. Respectfully submitted, /s/ John C. Ellis, Jr. JOHN C. ELLIS, JR. Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. Attorneys for Mr. Loya

Case 3:08-cr-02124-IEG

Document 27-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JUAN DIEGO EMILIANO LOYA, ) ) Defendant. ) _______________________________________)

Case No. 08cr2124-IEG

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Counsel for Defendant certifies that the foregoing pleading, is true and accurate to the best of his information and belief, and that a copy of the foregoing Defendant's Proposed Voir Dire has been electronically served this day upon: Douglas Keehn, Assistant United States Attorney 880 Front Street San Diego, CA 92101

Dated: September 2, 2008

/s/ John C. Ellis, Jr. JOHN C. ELLIS, JR. Federal Defenders 225 Broadway, Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92101-5030 (619) 234-8467 (tel) (619) 687-2666 (fax) E-mail: [email protected]