whether-federal-prosecutors-can-threaten-defense-witnesses

QUESTIONS PRESENTED QUESTION ONE: THIS COURT HAS LONG HELD THAT FOR A JUDGE TO THREATEN A DEFENSE WITNESS WITH PERJURY IF HE TESTIFIES FOR THE DEFENSE VIOLATES THE DEFENDANTS RIGHTS TO PRESENT A DEFENSE, TO COMPULSORY PROCESS, AND A FAIR TRIAL. THIS CASE PRESENTS THE COURT WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE FOR THE FIRST TIME WHETHER THAT SAME RULE SHOULD APPLY TO FEDERAL PROSECUTORS? QUESTION TWO: WHETHER A DEFENDANT IS DEPRIVED OF A FAIR TRIAL WHEN HIS CODEFENDANTS LAWYER IS ALSO SURREPTITIOUSLY REPRESENTING THE VICTIM, CREATING A JOINT MONETARY MOTIVE BETWEEN THE CONFLICTED LAWYER AND HIS TWO CLIENTS TO PROVIDE FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST HIM? QUESTION THREE: AN ISSUE NOT ADDRESSED IN GAMBLE V. U.S. IS WHETHER THE “DUAL SOVEREINTY DOCTRINE” SHOULD APPLY TO THE LONG-TERM CONCERTED ACTION OF FEDERAL AND STATE AUTHORITIES TO PROSECUTE AN INDIVIDUAL IN FEDERAL COURT FOR VIOLATING THE VERY SAME STATE CRIMINAL STATUTES FOR WHICH THE DEFENDANT HAS ALREADY BEEN PUNISHED IN REPEATED STATE COURT PROCEDINGS? THIS CASE PRESENT THE COURT WITH THAT OPPORTUNITY. : . | : |