You are on page 1of 61
94—1450 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Nos, 94-1492, 94-1493 UNITED OF AMERICA, Appellee, Cross-Appellant, DANIEL MILIKOWSKY, Defendant -Appellant, Cross-Appellee, MACC HOLDING CORP., Defendant -Appellant ANNE K. BINGAMAN Assistant Attorney General DIANE P. WOOD Deputy As wnt_Attorney Gener: JOHN J. POWERS, III MARION L. JETTON Artorneys OF COUNSEL: Department of Justice Antit D: = Rm. 3224 PETER J. LEVITAS loth & P vania Aven Washington, D.C. 20530 Attorney 202) 514-3680 Department of Justice Antitrust Division Washington, D.C, 20001 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT. 2... 1.7 eee JURISDICTION © 2. ee ee STATEMENT OF ISSUES...) ee ee STATEMENT OF THE CASE... 2... ee ee eee I. NATURE OF THE CASE, COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS, DISPOSITION Te] STATEMENT, OF ATHE| FACTS) ee tet fa Pee Whe Consp sc acys B. Sentencing Determinations .....-..- 1. Guidelines Calculations... ..... 2. The Sentencing Hearing and Judgment . . . SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT 2 2. 2 0. ee I. DEBERRY’S TESTIMONY CONCERNING WHEN HE FIRST TOLD THE GOVERNMENT THAT CHICAGO WAS THE SITE OF ONE OF HIS MEETINGS WITH MILIKOWSKY DID NOT DEPRIVE MILIKOWSKY (OFSETS|RIGHTETOPAT FAIR TRIAL 90g as suger A. DeBerry’s Testimony . 2.2... ee ee B, DeBerry’s Testimony Was Not False And, In Any Event, Milikowsky Was Not Prejudiced By DeBerry‘s Failure Of Recollection ... . . 1. DeBerry’s Testimony Was Not False... . The Testimony Was Not "Uncorrected," or Prejudicial ee C. The Government’s Closing Argument Did Not Misrepresent The Evidence... ... - II, THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT IMPROPERLY RESTRICT APPELLANT’S CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DEBERRY . . . . . III. THE GOVERNMENT’S CLOSING ARGUMENT WAS PROPER . 13 13 14 15 a7 17 18 21 22 25 28 30 37 IV. THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED IN DEPARTING FROM THE GUIDELINES SENTENCE ON THE BASIS OF POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS OF MILIKOWSKY’S INCARCERATION ON COMPANIES OWED BY HIM. 2... 1... ee ey Gtandacdioc| Review eis e0 tes etn ee B. The Possibility That Milikowsky’s Businesses Might Be Adversely Affected By His Incarceration Is Not A Valid Basis For Departure. ...... CONCLUSION © 2. ee ee ee ai