# United States v. Timothy Glen Osterbrock

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · December 15, 1989 · 891 F.2d 1216

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9479800

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy Glen OSTERBROCK, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 15, 1989
- **Citations:** 891 F.2d 1216; 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 19067; 1989 WL 150513
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wellford
- **Judges:** Celebrezze, Krupansky, Wellford
- **Cited by:** 16 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9479800

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that the petitioner failed to prove that his counsel was deficient by not objecting to the reading of a witness’s testimony to the jury by the court reporter in his and his counsel’s absence, or that the failure to object was prejudicial
- concluding that, where the verdict was returned and the jury was polled in the presence of the defendant, any prejudice resulting from counsel's absence was merely speculative
- finding merely speculative prejudice resulting from the absence of defense counsel harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
- applying harmless error review to attorney’s trial absence when jury verdict was returned

## Opinion text

WELLFORD, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
While I concur in the result reached by the majority, I write separately to emphasize an abiding concern about the practice of permitting proceedings to take place before the jury outside the presence of the trial judge and/or the attorney for the defendant. While no prejudice was demonstrated in this particular case, district judges and attorneys should avoid this practice, which may under some circumstances necessitate a new trial or raise the possibility of claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and attorney malpractice.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9479800. Public record. Not legal advice.