Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the district court's denial of Arthur's motion to dismiss the indictment

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the district court's denial of Arthur’s motion to dismiss the indictment because the Government deported a witness whose testimony would have been material, favorable, and noncumulative. 2. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the district court's refusal to inspect the Government’s file of the deported witness for material subject to disclosure under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), based on the Government’s claim that it had satisfied its Brady obligations. 3. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the district court's exclusion of statements that the deported witness made that were against his penal interest. 4. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the district court's giving a “willful blindness” jury instruction lacking any evidentiary basis. 5. Whether Arthur was entitled to acquittal because the Government failed to prove that Arthur knew that: (1) the funds derived from illegal activity, an element of all charged offenses; and (2) the transactions were designed to conceal the funds, an element of concealment money laundering. i RULE 14.1(b) STATEMENT There are no parties in addition to those listed in the caption. ii