Opinion ID: 779583
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Fifth Assignment of Error

Text: 45 Under his fifth assignment, Lawrence challenges his indictment, claiming the process was improper and rendered unreliable due to the prosecution's submission of highly inflammatory, irrelevant evidence to the grand jury. Lawrence failed to raise this issue prior to trial as required by Fed.R.Crim.P. 12(b): 46 Any defense, objection, or request which is capable of determination without the trial of the general issue may be raised before trial by motion. Motions may be written or oral at the discretion of the judge. The following must be raised prior to trial: 47 (1) Defenses and objections based on defects in the institution of the prosecution; or 48 (2) Defenses and objections based on defects in the indictment or information (other than that it fails to show jurisdiction in the court or to charge an offense which objections shall be noticed by the court at any time during the pendency of the proceedings); 49 (emphasis added). 50 This court strictly applies Rule 12(b), and has repeatedly held that failure to raise 12(b) motions in a timely fashion precludes appellate review. United States v. Oldfield, 859 F.2d 392, 396 (6th Cir.1988) (citing cases). Because Lawrence failed to raise his objection in a timely fashion, this court is precluded from reviewing Lawrence's fifth assignment of error. Id.; see also United States v. Castro, 908 F.2d 85, 89 (6th Cir.1990) (An indictment, valid on its face, is not subject to challenge on the ground that the grand jury acted on inadequate or incomplete evidence.).