Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Cota Barreras

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

February 27, 2019

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Luis Eduardo Cota Barreras (1), and Angel Morales(2), Defendants.

          Ruth Shnider, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for Plaintiff.

          Kirk M. Anderson, Esq., Anderson Law Firm, PLLC, counsel for Defendant Barreras.

          Coley J. Grostyan, Esq., Law Office of Coley J. Grostyan, PLLC, Joseph S. Friedberg, Esq., Joseph S. Friedberg, Chartered, counsel for Defendant Morales.

          ORDER

          BECKY R. THORSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Now before the Court are two pretrial motions. Based on the file and documents contained therein, along with the memoranda and arguments of counsel, the Court makes the following Order:

         1. Government's Motion for Discovery.

         The Government moves for discovery pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16(b), 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, and 26.2. Defendants do not oppose this motion. Therefore, the Government's Motion for Discovery (Doc. No. 21) is GRANTED.

         2. Defendant Morales's Request for Pretrial Discovery.

         Defendant Morales filed a request for pretrial discovery, listing the requests in twenty-one separate numbered paragraphs. Defendant Morales's Request for Pretrial Discovery (Doc. No. 24) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:

         a. Requests for Discovery Under Rules 12 and 16. (Paragraphs 1- 7.)

         The Government responds that it has already complied with its obligations to disclose the information requested in these paragraphs and has even made discovery not required by law. Moreover, the Government acknowledges its ongoing disclosure obligations and states that it will continue to abide by its disclosure requirements. Finally, the Government objects to any disclosure of expert witnesses or reports as premature but does not object to an order requiring mutual expert disclosures by all parties two weeks prior to trial. On that understanding, Defendant Morales's discovery requests are GRANTED.

         b. Motion for Early Disclosure of Jencks Act Material. (Paragraphs 8, 11.)

         Defendant Morales seeks early disclosure of copies of all statements made by witnesses or co-conspirators (i.e., Jencks Act materials). The Government objects to this motion on the grounds that it may not be required to make pretrial disclosure of Jencks material. Because the Jencks Act plainly provides that “no statement or report in the possession of the United States which was made by a Government witness or prospective Government witness (other than the defendant) shall be the subject of subpoena, discovery, or inspection until said witness has testified on direct examination in the trial of the case, ” Defendant Morales's request for Jencks Act materials is DENIED. Nothing in this Order precludes the Government from providing Jencks material before trial, should it choose to do so.

         c. Motion for List of Government Witnesses. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.