Opinion ID: 757025
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Requested Read-back of Testimony

Text: 198 Abouhalima argues that the court denied him a fair trial by improperly responding to a jury note requesting the read-back of certain testimony. 199 Abouhalima complains that Judge Duffy improperly declined to read certain portions of the testimony of Michael Felton, Carl Butler and Ashraf Moneeb. Although Judge Duffy did read back certain testimony in response to the jury's requests, Abouhalima argues that he failed to include important testimony in the read-backs. This argument fails because the portions of testimony that Abouhalima points to were not responsive to the jury's read-back requests. 200 A trial court's refusal to allow read-backs of testimony in response to jury requests during deliberations is within its broad discretion. See, e.g., United States v. Criollo, 962 F.2d 241, 243 (2d Cir.1992) (citing United States v. McElroy, 910 F.2d 1016, 1026 (2d Cir.1990)). Judge Duffy did not abuse his discretion. 201 First, the jury's note requested a read-back of Felton's testimony concerning [i]dentification of A, tenants[,] and B, visitors to 40 Pamrapo. Abouhalima argues that Judge Duffy should have read to the jury Felton's testimony that: (1) Felton was never in the apartment when the big guy was there; (2) a second-floor tenant at 40 Pamrapo owned the Lincoln automobile pictured in a photograph of the building; (3) Felton did not see Salameh move out of the apartment; and (4) Felton was interviewed repeatedly by the FBI and the news media. 202 None of the requested testimony was responsive to the jury's note because none of this testimony involved the identification of Pamrapo tenants and visitors. Thus, Judge Duffy properly refused to read it. 203 Second, the jury asked to hear Butler's testimony relating to the [i]dentification of visitors to 40 Pamrapo. Abouhalima claims that the court should have read Butler's testimony that only one tenant lived in the Pamrapo apartment and that Butler was unable to describe the drivers of various cars he saw at Pamrapo. This testimony was not responsive to the jury's request about the identification of visitors and was properly excluded. 204 Finally, the jury's note requested a read-back of Moneeb's testimony concerning the [i]dentification of visitors to roommates at [the] shared apartment. Moneeb's roommates were Salameh and Yousef. Abouhalima maintains that Judge Duffy should have read Moneeb's testimony that: (1) Moneeb lived and studied in the living room and, therefore, Salameh's visitors closed the bedroom door out of courtesy and not necessarily for privacy; (2) Moneeb was nervous during his testimony and also when the FBI interviewed him; (3) the FBI, when interviewing Moneeb, kept him in handcuffs and held a gun to his head; (4) the FBI had taken Moneeb's green card and refused to return it until after his testimony; and (5) Moneeb's citizenship had been delayed since the FBI started questioning him about this case. Once again, Judge Duffy's read-back was proper because the additional testimony was not responsive.