Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Bollin (D) was convicted of fraud. The schemes promised enormous profits, supposedly derived from secret trading in debentures issued by European 'prime' banks. The investment principal was supposedly secured by a bank guarantee and, therefore, was never at risk. Millions of dollars in profits were to be generated within a few months from the trading of debentures. For example, one program, 'Program 39,' offered a profit of $ 73,000,000 in ten months, based on an investment of $ 400,000. D appealed contending that the district court abused its discretion when it allowed P to present a redacted version of his grand jury testimony but refused to allow him to present the omitted portions under the rule of completeness or the former testimony exception to the hearsay rule.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.