Opinion ID: 1374773
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Was there a violation?

Text: Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 30(b) states: The court must inform the parties before closing arguments how it intends to rule on the requested instructions. FED.R.CRIM.P. 30(b) (emphasis added). The rule is grounded in `basic concepts of fairness,' allowing `counsel to conform their arguments to the law as it will thereafter be presented by the judge to the jury.' United States v. Rommy, 506 F.3d 108, 125 (2d Cir.2007) (quoting United States v. James, 239 F.3d 120, 124 (2d Cir.2000)). In this case, the district court clearly violated Rule 30(b) when it ruled on jury instructions by providing defense counsel a copy of the jury instructions just seconds before closing arguments began, without having had any discussion about the contents of the instructions. The purpose of the Rule is to allow counsel a meaningful opportunity to tailor their closing arguments to the court's pronouncement of the law governing the case. A few seconds is not a meaningful opportunity. Furthermore, the court's actions placed defense counsel in the untenable position of either paying attention to the government's closing argument or familiarizing herself with the law of the case, as she could not reasonably be expected to do both.