Opinion ID: 399380
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: limitation on defendant's oral argument time

Text: 67 Tietjen contends that the district court overly restricted the time available for his concluding argument to the jury. The district court's decision as to the amount of time permitted for a closing argument is reviewable only for abuse of discretion. United States v. Bernes, 602 F.2d 716, 722 (5th Cir. 1979). Here, the district court asked Tietjen's counsel how much time he needed for closing argument. T-1028. He responded, about 30 minutes. During the argument, the district court informed Tietjen's counsel that he had five minutes remaining, and then that he needed to conclude his argument. Counsel requested only a few more minutes, which the district court granted. In a later bench conference, counsel objected to having been cut short. The district court noted that counsel initially had argued longer than 30 minutes, had continued for five more minutes, and then had received the additional time requested. On these facts, we cannot agree that Tietjen's oral argument time was overly restricted. Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in the extent to which the court limited Tietjen's closing argument time.