Consistently benefiting the prosecution, a request to instruct the jury on willful blindness usually comes on the heels of weak evidence of knowledge, without any advance warning to the defense, and invites the jury to convict based on evidence of mere negligence or recklessness.
This page provides news and resources on the willful blindness doctrine and efforts at meaningful reform.
In 2011, with the civil patent infringement case Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., the Supreme Court affirmed the validity of the willful blindness doctrine in both civil and criminal settings while simultaneously establishing some standards for the doctrine's application beyond that required in most federal circuit courts. At the outset, this guidance appeared to be a step in the right direction – albeit insufficient to protect due process rights. Since Global-Tech, however, the federal courts of appeals have been reluctant to apply this more stringent standard in criminal cases and the playing field has remained dramatically uneven.
Pictured above: NACDL Members Professor Ellen Podgor and Andrew Wise discussing the willful blindness doctrine at NACDL's 7th Annual Defending the White Collar Case Seminar on September 23, 2011.
News, Commentary & Advocacy
"Landmark 'willful blindness' decision has failed to deliver," Daily Journal, April 4, 2014.
"Defense Witness Immunity & Global Tech - Important Issues on Cert," White Collar Crime Prof Blog, October 7, 2012.
"Patently Unusual: How a Recent Supreme Court Patent Decision Alters the Landscape for Proving Criminal Knowledge," White-Collar Crime, Westlaw Journal, September 2011.
"Supreme Court Speaks About Willful Blindness," White Collar Crime Prof Blog, June 1, 2011
"Improving 'Willful Blindness' Jury Instructions In Criminal Cases After High Court's Decision in Global-Tech," BNA Criminal Law Reporter, June 15, 2011
"Quality Control at the Second Circuit: 38 Years of Willfulness Jurisprudence Thrown Out in Kaiser?," White Collar Crime Prof Blog, July 3, 2010
Prosecutions Based on Willful Blindness
Wesley C. Walton v. United States
- U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for cert. on Jan. 7, 2013.
- Amicus Filing: NACDL Amicus Brief in Support of Petition, Wesley C. Walton v. United States, No. 12-5847 (Sept. 19, 2012)
- Defense Filing: Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Wesley C. Walton v. United States, No. 12-5847 (Aug. 16, 2012)
- Circuit Opinion: United States v. James Brooks, Wesley C. Walton, James Patrick Phillips, 681 F.3d 678 (5th Cir. 2012)
Global-Tech Appliances, Inc., et al. v. SEB S.A.
- Supreme Court Opinion: Global-Tech Appliances, Inc., et al. v. SEB S.A., No. 10-6 (U.S. May 31, 2011)
United States v. David C. Geisen
- U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for cert. on April 4, 2011.
- Defense Filing: Petition for Writ of Certiorari, David C. Geisen v. United States, No. 10-720 (Dec. 1, 2010)
- Government Filing: Brief For the United States In Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari, David C. Geisen v. United States, No. 10-720 (March 2011)
- Defense Filing: Reply Brief for Petitioner In Support of Petition for Writ of Certiorari, David C. Geisen v. United States, No. 10-720 (March 2011)
- Circuit Opinion: United States v. David C. Geisen, 612 F.3d 471 (6th Cir. 2010)
United States v. Mark P. Kaiser
- Circuit Opinion: United States v. Mark P. Kaiser, No. 07-2365-cr (2nd Cir. July 1, 2010) (holding the "conscious avoidance" jury instruction in error because it failed to include either the "high probability" or the "actual belief" language that is required and did not suggest that actual belief would absolve Kaiser of culpability).
- Defense Filing: Brief, United States v. Mark P. Kaiser, No. 07-2365-cr (2nd Cir. Oct. 2008)
- Defense Filing: Reply Brief, United States v. Mark P. Kaiser, No. 07-2365-cr (2nd Cir. March 2009)
United States v. Richard Stadtmauer
Continue reading below
Pattern Cross-Examination for DNA and Biological Evidence: A Trial Strategy Guide
NACDL’s Pattern Cross-Examination for DNA and Biological Evidence will assist criminal defense practitioners in scoring points when cross-examining forensic experts in cases involving DNA and biological evidence. This resource contains thousands of questions that will help defense lawyers cross-examine challenging witnesses without reinventing the wheel with each new case. It includes pattern questions that can be used to dominate prosecution DNA experts and level the playing field at trial.
Cross-Examination of the Analyst in Drug Prosecutions (2nd Ed.) By James M. Shellow
Now in its second edition with some new material, James M. Shellow’s book offers what its title promises: ways of thinking about cross-examining the forensic analysts in drug cases. But the book is so much more than that. It offers a look inside the mind of one of the finest cross-examiners and defense lawyers the United States has produced in the last seventy years. This small book can inspire and direct you in making big changes in the way you defend your clients and think about the entire project of trying any case.
Justice For All, Justice Now White T-Shirt (Women’s)
This custom, vintage-faded NACDL t-shirt is 50% polyester, 25% cotton, and 25% rayon weighing 5.2 oz. and is lightwieght, flexible and soft, providing maximum comfort. It features the "Justice For All, Justice Now" slogan and Lady Liberty image on the front, with the NACDL logo on the back. Currently available in both men's and women's sizes in both black and white colors. View the full line-up of colors and sizes on our online store, as well as our other popular and best-selling t-shirt designs at: nacdl.org/store.
Drug Cases Resource Materials Collection - CD-ROM
NACDL’s Drug Cases Resource Materials Collection is the sweeping culmination of every single article of written materials ever published from each installment of NACDL's annual "Defending Modern Drug Cases" seminar. Totaling over 12,000 pages, this vast collection includes 12+ years of motions, briefs, reports, outlines, transcripts, case citations, scholarly articles, powerpoints and other written commentaries. This collection provides trial strategies and tactics you can immediately apply to your current cases.
Mental Illness & the Law: Addressing and Litigating Behavioral Health Disorders in Criminal Cases
Whether it is insanity, impairment, a disorder, or adolescent brain development; mental health and intellectual competence issues affect pretrial supervision, trial and sentencing, and your chances of successfully advocating for your impaired client. This training provides ideas and proven solutions to assist you in advocating for your client during trial, whether it be insanity defenses, jury selection, cross of expert witnesses, persuasion, or mitigation at sentencing.
- Circuit Opinion: United States v. Richard Stadtmauer, 620 F.3d 238 (3rd Cir. 2010) (upheld willful blindness instruction in criminal tax fraud prosecution).
- Defense Filing: Memorandum of Richard Stadtmauer In Opposition To The Government's Request For A Deliberate Ignorance or Willful Blindness Charge, United States v. Richard Stadtmauer, No. 05-249 (D.N.J. May 22, 2008)
Webcast CLE - The Accidental Felon: Challenging the Expansion of the Willful Blindness Doctrine
In Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., the Supreme Court decided a civil patent case that dramatically altered the criminal legal landscape of willful blindness. In this one-hour program, our highly experienced panelists Timothy O'Toole (Miller & Chevalier, Washington, DC) and Ellen Podgor (Stetson Univ. College of Law, Gulfport, FL), evaluate the contours of the willful blindness doctrine, explore the latest jurisprudence, and offer practical defense strategies. (Recorded June 17, 2011) Watch a free online video!
Webcast CLE - Ignorance is Bliss, But Is It Also a Crime? Opening Your Eyes to the Willful Blindness Doctrine
The willful blindness or conscious avoidance doctrine has allowed prosecutors to obtain convictions against several high-profile white collar defendants, including Bernard Ebbers, Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling. This highly experienced panel evaluates the contours of the doctrine, explore recent cases that highlight the current state of the law and offer successful defense strategies. This program features Moderator Andrew Wise (Miller & Chevalier, Washington, DC), joined by Daniel Brown (Murphy & McGonigle, Washington, DC), K.C. Maxwell (Law Office of K.C. Maxwell, San Francisco, CA), and Alexandra Walsh (Baker Botts, Washington, DC). (Recorded September 17, 2010) Watch a free online video!