DOJ-OGR-00022075.jpg

683 KB

Extraction Summary

3
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 683 KB
Summary

This legal document, filed on April 24, 2020, is a portion of a government motion arguing that it has fulfilled its discovery obligations to a defendant named Thomas. The government asserts it has complied with legal standards, including Rule 16 and the Brady rule, by providing substantial evidence, such as hundreds of hours of video surveillance, well in advance of the trial.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Thomas Defendant
Mentioned in the heading "Thomas is Not Entitled to Additional Materials" as the subject of the legal argument.
Brady
Referenced in the context of the 'Brady rule' from a legal precedent concerning the disclosure of impeachment material.
Stevens
Referenced in the case citation 'United States v. Stevens', which provides a definition for material evidence.

Organizations (1)

Name Type Context
The Government Government agency
Referred to as the prosecuting party in the legal case, with discovery and disclosure obligations.

Timeline (1 events)

2019-07-05
The Government produced hundreds of hours of video surveillance footage dating back to July 5, 2019, as part of its discovery obligations.
The Government defendants

Relationships (1)

The Government Legal (adversarial) Thomas
The document outlines the Government's legal position against the defendant, Thomas, regarding the fulfillment of discovery obligations in a criminal case.

Key Quotes (2)

"material to preparing the defense"
Source
— Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 16 (A standard from Rule 16 defining items that the Government must permit defendants to inspect and copy.)
DOJ-OGR-00022075.jpg
Quote #1
"if it could be used to counter the Government’s case or bolster a defense."
Source
— United States v. Stevens (A quote from a court case that further defines what is considered "material to preparing the defense" under Rule 16.)
DOJ-OGR-00022075.jpg
Quote #2

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,019 characters)

Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 35 Filed 04/24/20 Page 13 of 34
demand for it. 267 F.3d at 146. The court held that as a general rule, Brady and its progeny do not require immediate disclosure of all impeachment material upon a defendant’s request. Id. It found that the time required for its effective use would depend on the materiality of the evidence as well as the particular circumstances of the case, and suggested that district courts may order disclosure of material it deems material as a matter of case management. Id. As described above, the Government disclosed reports and notes of witness statements as part of its discovery productions, such that the defendants will have possessed substantial material that may serve as potential impeachment evidence for one year in advance of trial.
B. Rule 16
Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requires the Government to permit the defendants to inspect and copy documents and objects within the Government’s possession, custody, or control if the items are material to preparing the defense, if the Government intends to use them in its case-in-chief at trial, or if the items were obtained from or belong to the defendant. Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(E). An item is “material to preparing the defense” under Rule 16 “if it could be used to counter the Government’s case or bolster a defense.” United States v. Stevens, 985 F.2d 1175, 1180-81 (2d Cir. 1993).
II. Thomas is Not Entitled to Additional Materials
A. The Government Has Satisfied its Discovery and Disclosure Obligations
As an initial matter, the Government is aware of, has satisfied, and will continue to satisfy its discovery and disclosure obligations.
The Government has met its Rule 16 discovery and disclosure obligations. As set forth above, the Government has produced an expansive amount of discovery, which includes among other things, hundreds of hours of video surveillance going back to July 5, 2019 (despite the fact
8
DOJ-OGR-00022075

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document