The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Tham, 960 F.2d 1391 (9th Cir. 1992):
Tham also claims that he was prejudiced by the court's failure to provide either counsel with a written copy of the jury instructions before they were read to the jury. This was because the court had not prepared them until the time for delivery of closing arguments. Even if the court's action constituted a violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 30, we find no prejudice to Tham because neither party was "unfairly prevented from arguing its defense to the jury or substantially misled in formulating and presenting arguments." United States v. Gaskin, 849 F.2d 454, 458 (9th Cir.1988).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.