Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Biosecurity

Convicted Corporation Has No Right
to Challenge Disclosure

Craig Raysor
National AgLaw Center Graduate Assistant

In United States v. Donahoe., 380 F. Supp.2d 1 (D. ME 2005), the District Court of Maine held that a corporation that had been convicted of a crime cannot challenge the compelled disclosure of confidential information regarding the crime that involved the same set of circumstances that gave rise to the defendant’s trial.

Defendant, James Donahoe, plead guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud, to conceal biological materials imported contrary to law, to make false statements, and to violate the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act,. Id. at 1. During the sentencing phase of Donahoe’s trial, he requested a specified document pertaining to production of avian influenza vaccine from the Maine Biological Laboratory (“MBL”), which was involved in a trial regarding the same charges and circumstances. Id. at 2. MBL argued that such revelation would “require an unnecessary disclosure of propriety information,” and that it would be unnecessary because the defendant and his colleagues could testify to the contents of the documents without the disclosure Id.

The district court held that MBL was not entitled to contest the revelation of the documents since it was convicted of a markedly similar crime that involved the same set of circumstances. Id. In addition, Donahoe has a right to present exculpatory or favorable evidence at the sentencing portion of his trial. See id. MBL was ordered to produce the documents that would remain confidential between the parties pending the sentencing hearing. Id.

The case was decided on June 28, 2005; this summary was posted Jan. 4, 2006.