United States v. Hano

by
A five-year statute of limitations for a defendant implicated by DNA testing, 18 U.S.C. 3297, permits indictment within five years of that testing regardless of whether the limitation period otherwise applicable to the offense has already expired. The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment do not prohibit the use of the nontestimonial statements of a nontestifying criminal defendant against his codefendant in a joint trial.Defendants Hano and Arrastia-Cardoso were convicted of Hobbs Act robbery and conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery. The Eleventh Circuit rejected Hano's argument that the indictment against him was not returned within the applicable limitation period; the evidentiary issues raised by defendants did not merit reversal; Hano failed to establish that the denial of his motion to obtain a DNA profile resulted in any prejudice; the court rejected Hano's argument that the government failed to produce sufficient evidence to support his convictions; the government did not improperly comment on Arrastia-Cardoso's decision not to testify; and Hano "otherwise used" a dangerous weapon in the commission of the robbery so the district court was warranted in applying a four-level sentencing enhancement. Accordingly, the court affirmed the convictions and sentences. View "United States v. Hano" on Justia Law