Defendant's perjury and fraud convictions are affirmed where: 1) the district court correctly instructed the jury on the materiality element of the perjury and fraud charges; 2) there was no use of the Phase II counts or evidence in the Phase I proceedings of defendant's trial, and thus the bifurcation process was not so manifestly prejudicial as to require reversal; and 3) the district court should have consulted the parties or counsel before responding to the jury's request to see the indictment, but the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
Argued and Submitted August 31, 2009
Filed November 25, 2009
Dennis P. Riordan, Riordan & Horgan, San Francisco, CA
Amber S. Rosen, Assistant United States Attorney, San Jose, CA