Court Opinion

ID: 9460694
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 21:57:54.062094+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:36:44.414188
License: Public Domain

*178VAN OOSTERHOUT and MATTHES, Senior Circuit Judges
(specially concurring).
We agree that the judgment of conviction should be affirmed. We concur in Judge Lay’s opinion on all issues except the issue relating to the interpretation of Rule 16(a)(1), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. On such issue, we agree with Judge Lay’s determination that no prejudicial error has been committed. We do not reach the issue of whether a non-verbatim oral statement of the defendant incorporated in the government agent’s report constitutes “written or recorded statements or confessions made by the defendant” as such words are used in Rule 16(a)(1). Such issue was not adequately briefed or argued. We believe the disposition of such controversial issue should await a situation where resolution of the issue is required to dispose of the case and the issue is fairly briefed and argued by the parties.