DOJ-OGR-00005369.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 367-1 Filed 10/22/21 Page 12 of 17

Commented [A12]: DEFENDANT OBJECTION: The defense to this question because it is not relevant for the jury to know about multiple searches. Further, there have been no motions to suppress these searches and the court has not made any such determination. In addition to being factually inaccurate, the question causes any prospective juror to unnecessarily speculate about the admissibility or non-admissibility of certain evidence.

Commented [A13R12]: GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: This question mirrors a standard jury instruction on this subject.

Commented [A14]: DEFENDANT OBJECTION: The Sixth Amendment secures to criminal defendants the right to trial by an impartial jury. Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358, 377-78 (2010). The function of voir dire is not to counsel prospective jurors on the rules and procedures of criminal law but rather to expose potential bias or prejudice. United States v. Whitten, 610 F.3d 168, 184-85 (2d Cir. 2010) (citing Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (1992)). The Government proposed questions are not designed to expose potential bias or prejudice. Voir dire is not an opportunity for one party to inject their theory of the case or preview particular evidence for the jury. The Government’s question also mis-states the law. For example, there are grounds (such as a missing witness instruction) that would allow the jury to draw inferences against the Government based on the absence of certain testifying individuals.

evidence obtained from those searches is admissible in this case. Do you have any feelings or opinions about searches conducted by law enforcement officers, or the use of evidence obtained from searches, that would affect your ability to be fair and impartial in this case?

43. You also may hear testimony in this case from expert witnesses. Have any of you had any experiences with experts, or do you have any general feelings about the use of experts, that would affect your ability to be fair and impartial in this case?

44. Does anyone have any expectations about the types of evidence that the Government should or will present in this criminal trial, or in a criminal trial more generally?

45. Is there anything that has been covered or that has not been covered that you wish to discuss privately with the Court and counsel?

46. Would any of you be unable to follow my instructions that the Government is not required to use any particular investigative technique uncovering evidence of or prosecuting a crime?

47. The defendant is charged with acting with others in the commission of the charged crimes. Those other individuals are not on trial here. You may not draw any inference, favorable or unfavorable, toward the government or the defendant from that fact. You also may not speculate as to the reason why other persons are not on trial. Is there anyone who cannot follow this instruction or who for this reason could have difficulty rendering a fair and impartial verdict?

Function of the Court and Jury

48. The function of the jury is to decide questions of fact. You are the sole judges of the facts and nothing that the Court or the lawyers say or do may encroach in any way on your role as the exclusive fact finders. However, when it comes to the law, you must take your instructions from the Court and you are bound by those instructions. You may not substitute your notions of

11
DOJ-OGR-00005369