Case 3:10-cr-00003-SA-SAA Document 55 Filed 11/01/10 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V. CRIMINAL NO.: 3:10CR003-SA

PHILIP HALBERT NEILSON DEFENDANT

ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE

United States’ Motion in Limine to Bar Mention or Evidence of “Selective

Prosecution” [41]

The Government seeks to preclude the Defendant from making statements or introducing

evidence at trial concerning the alleged selective prosecution of the Defendant. The Government

asserts that (1) any selective prosecution defense is for the court to decide, not a jury; and (2) any

argument attacking the government’s motive in prosecution is irrelevant to the issue of innocence

or guilt.

The Defendant contends that evidence of the animosity between Defendant and the United

States Attorney for the Northern District of Mississippi is necessary for a complete defense.

Defendant asserts that these arguments are not evidence of selective prosecution or jury nullification,

but “so that the jury can understand the origin, nature and purpose of these charges.”

The United States Supreme Court has placed evidence of “selective prosecution” claims

squarely under the court’s authority. United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464, 116 S. Ct.

1480, 134 L. Ed. 2d 687 (1996) (a selective prosecution claim “asks a court” to exercise judicial

power over a ‘special province’ of the Executive.”). Defendant has not cited any law or authority

supporting his “defense” and the admissibility thereof to a jury. Thus, arguments and allusions to

selective prosecution to the jury is improper. Moreover, this evidence is irrelevant to the jury’s

decision as to the conflict of interest and false statement charges. The Government’s Motion in
 Case 3:10-cr-00003-SA-SAA Document 55 Filed 11/01/10 Page 2 of 2

Limine [41] is GRANTED.

United States’ Motion in Limine to Bar Mention or Evidence of the Appointment of the
United States Attorneys or the Circumstances of Recusal of the Northern District of
Mississippi United States Attorney’s Office [42]

The Government seeks to preclude the defense from making statements or introducing

evidence at trial concerning the recusal of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern

District of Mississippi or the appointment of the Assistant United States Attorneys from the Middle

District of Louisiana to represent the United States in this matter. The Government contends these

matters are not matters for a jury’s consideration, nor are they relevant.

Defendant asserts that evidence of this nature is necessary for the jury to understand the

origin, nature and purpose of the charges.

The recusal of the Northern District of Mississippi United States Attorney’s Office and

appointment of the Government attorneys is not relevant to Defendant’s innocence or guilt. Thus,

the Government’s Motion in Limine [42] is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED, this the 1st day of November, 2010.

/s/ Sharion Aycock
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE