## Facts

- On February 26, 1993, a bomb in a rented van exploded in the World Trade Center’s underground garage, killing six people, injuring over a thousand, and causing extensive property damage.
- The government prosecuted a multi-defendant conspiracy connected to the bombing and related preparatory and post-bombing conduct, supported by numerous alleged overt acts.
- Trial evidence tied each appellant to operational roles in the plot, including acquiring materials, arranging storage, and obtaining the van used for the bomb.
- Investigators recovered physical items and documents, including bomb-making and planning materials, from locations and possessions linked to defendants, including materials seized from Ajaj.
- The defendants were tried jointly in the Southern District of New York after extensive pretrial litigation over suppression, admissibility, and severance.

## Issues

1. Whether physical evidence and documents (including materials seized from Ajaj and from a storage shed) should have been suppressed under the Fourth Amendment or excluded under evidentiary and constitutional theories.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 by admitting graphic or inflammatory evidence and other bombing-related proof.
3. Whether the conspiracy and related instructions were legally sufficient, including whether the government had to prove a defendant specifically intended the World Trade Center bombing rather than participation in a broader unlawful agreement.
4. Whether denial of severance in a joint conspiracy trial caused unfair prejudice or impaired any defendant’s trial rights.
5. Whether alleged prosecutorial misconduct or discovery violations required reversal or a new trial.
6. Whether sentencing was invalid because defendants did not effectively waive the right to counsel at sentencing.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the judgments of conviction, rejecting the defendants’ suppression, evidentiary, instruction, severance, and misconduct/discovery challenges.
- The court held that the district court’s evidentiary rulings, including admission of bombing-related and ideologically oriented materials, fell within permissible bounds and did not violate the First Amendment when used to prove intent, knowledge, or motive.
- The court upheld the conspiracy instructions and rejected a request to require proof that a particular defendant specifically intended the World Trade Center bombing, as opposed to knowingly joining an unlawful conspiracy whose acts were within its scope and reasonably foreseeable.
- The court affirmed denial of severance, concluding the joint trial did not create a level of prejudice requiring separate trials.
- The court vacated the sentences and remanded for resentencing because the record did not show an adequate waiver of the right to counsel at sentencing.
- The court declined to exercise appellate jurisdiction over certain post-trial motions still pending in the district court.

## Legal Principles

- Searches and seizures supported by valid warrants (or recognized exceptions) and probable cause generally satisfy Fourth Amendment requirements; suppression is not warranted absent a constitutional defect.
- Expressive or ideological materials may be admitted as evidence when relevant to motive, intent, knowledge, or planning in a criminal conspiracy, and their admission does not violate the First Amendment when not used to punish protected expression as such.
- Federal Rule of Evidence 403 balancing is committed to the trial court’s discretion; evidence depicting harm or casualties may be admissible when it proves elements such as causation, the nature of the device, or the scope of the offense.
- For conspiracy, the government must prove an agreement to commit federal offenses and the defendant’s knowing, intentional participation; liability for substantive acts of co-conspirators may attach when acts are in furtherance of the conspiracy, within its scope, and reasonably foreseeable.
- Joint trials are strongly favored in conspiracy prosecutions; severance is required only when a joint trial compromises a specific trial right or prevents a reliable verdict.
- Sentencing requires either representation by counsel or a valid, informed waiver; an inadequate waiver at sentencing requires resentencing even if convictions stand.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit upheld the World Trade Center bombing convictions, finding no reversible error in suppression rulings, evidentiary decisions, jury instructions, or denial of severance, but remanded for resentencing because the defendants’ waiver of counsel at sentencing was not adequately established.


United States v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1998)