Opinion ID: 683810
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Allowing Spencer to change his plea and testify.

Text: 17 The Defendants contend they were prejudiced by the district court allowing Spencer to change his plea and testify. They also assert the district court erred by not properly cautioning the jury not to infer guilt to the other defendants because of Spencer's change of plea. 18 The Defendants were not prejudiced by Spencer's testimony and plea. See United States v. Bavers, 787 F.2d 1022 (6th Cir.1985). The Sixth Circuit in Bavers found no error in allowing a co-defendant to change his/her plea during the course of a trial and testify against his co-defendants. Id. at 1028. The Bavers court further held there is no error in failing to sequester a co-defendant who changes his/her plea during trial, because any sequestration order applies only to known witnesses. Id. at 1029. Although not required by the holding in Bavers the district court went to great lengths to ensure the government's counsel was not privy to the information Spencer possessed about the Defendant's case by interviewing Spencer, Spencer's attorney and the United States attorney. 19 The second error argued by the Defendants is similarly without merit. It was proper for the trial court to give a cautionary instruction at the end of the trial rather than at the time of the plea change. Id. at 1028. 20 In the instant case, the district court instructed the jury that no weight was to be given to the fact Spencer changed his plea in the middle of the trial. This instruction was given at the close of evidence and before the jury retired to consider a verdict. The district court complied with Bavers by making efforts to ensure no confidential information about the co-defendants case was given to the government and properly instructed the jury about Spencer changing his plea during the trial. 21