Opinion ID: 658352
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Voir Dire on Relationship to Government Witnesses

Text: 107 Appellants claim that reversal is required because they could not voir dire jurors on their relationship with those government witnesses not included on the pretrial witness list. We rejected the same argument in United States v. Dischner, 974 F.2d 1502, 1522-23 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 1290, 122 L.Ed.2d 682 (1993). Although a trial court abuses its discretion in failing to ask prospective jurors any questions concerning acquaintance with any government witnesses, United States v. Washington, 819 F.2d 221, 224 (9th Cir.1987); United States v. Baldwin, 607 F.2d 1295, 1297 (9th Cir.1979), [n]either Baldwin nor Washington ... requires disclosure of all witnesses or directs the trial court to question veniremen about every possible government witness. Dischner, 974 F.2d at 1523. Furthermore, Appellants do not contend that any juror in fact was acquainted with any government witness.