United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Katherine Menendez United States Magistrate Judge.
matter is before the Court on the government's and Ms.
Natysin's motions for discovery and disclosure. The Court
held a hearing on the motions on July 10, 2018. Based on the
motions that were filed, the written responses, and the
arguments presented at the hearing, the Court enters the
The Government's Motion for Discovery (ECF No.
government's motion for discovery of information pursuant
to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure is
GRANTED. The defendant shall provide
discovery and disclosures as required by the Fed. R. Crim. P.
Ms. Natysin's Motion for Release of Brady
Materials (ECF No. 18)
Natysin's motion for disclosure of Brady
materials is GRANTED. The government is
obligated to disclose evidence favorable to the defendants as
required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963),
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and
their progeny. These cases place an ongoing obligation on
counsel for the government to disclose exculpatory evidence
and impeachment material to the defendants.
Ms. Natysin's Motion for Disclosure of Prior Acts (ECF
Natysin's motion for disclosure of Rule 404(b) evidence
is GRANTED. The government shall disclose
any evidence it intends to offer at trial pursuant to
Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) at least 30 days before
Ms. Natysin's Motion to Retain Rough Notes (ECF No.
Natysin's motion for government agents to retain rough
notes is GRANTED. Disclosure of rough notes
is not required by this Order.
Ms. Natysin's Motion for Disclosure of Experts (ECF No.
Natysin's motion for expert discovery is
GRANTED. The government shall make its
expert disclosures at least 30 days prior to
trial. Any expert disclosures to be made by Ms. Natysin must
be completed by two weeks before trial. As
discussed at the hearing, the government shall meet and
confer with Ms. Natysin at least 30 days
prior to trial to discuss whether any forensic accountant,
computer technician, or similar specialized witnesses will be
called, regardless of whether the government agrees that such
a witness is an expert as contemplated by the rules.
Ms. Natysin's Motion for Disclosure of Jencks Act
Materials (ECF No. 22)
Natysin's motion for early disclosure of Jencks Act
material is DENIED. The Jencks Act provides
that the government “need not produce Jencks statements
prior to a witness' testimony on direct
examination.” United States v. Douglas, 964
F.2d 738, 741 & n.2 (8th Cir. 1992) (citing 18 U.S.C.
§ 3500(b) and discussing the government's option to
make earlier voluntary disclosure, such as through an
“open file policy”). Given that this is a complex
fraud case, the Court encourages the government to disclose
Jencks Act material as soon as possible. To ...