United States v. Bauzó-Santiago
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
867 F.3d 13 (2017)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Jaime Bauzó-Santiago (defendant) was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. Bauzó was appointed public defenders. Bauzó began to have problems with the attorneys, believing that they were not sufficiently negotiating a plea bargain. Bauzó wrote a letter to the judge stating this and asking for new counsel. The letter stated that Bauzó had “always accepted [his] responsibility as to guilt” but simply wanted his prison time to be reasonable. Bauzó’s initially appointed attorneys withdrew, and Bauzó ultimately did not negotiate a plea agreement. At trial, the prosecution (plaintiff) sought to introduce the letter written to the judge. Bauzó filed a motion to exclude the letter, asserting that it was inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 410 (Rule 410). The district court denied the motion, and Bauzó was convicted. Bauzó appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thompson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.