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. Randle

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

August 6, 2019

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Johntez Leondis Randle (1), Defendant.

          Amber M. Brennan, Assistant United States Attorney, (for the Government); and

          Reynaldo A. Aligada, Jr., Assistant Federal Defender, (for Defendant).

          ORDER

          Tony N. Leung United States Magistrate Judge

         This matter is before the Court, United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung, on the following motions:

1. Government's Motion for Discovery (ECF No. 11);
2. Defendant's Pretrial Motion for Disclosure of Rule 404 Evidence (ECF No. 15);
3. Defendant's Pretrial Motion to Compel Attorney for the Government to Disclose Evidence Favorable to the Defendant (ECF No. 16);
4. Defendant's Pretrial Motion to Disclose and Make Informant Available for Interview (ECF No. 18);
5. Defendant's Motion for Early Disclosure of Jencks Act Material (ECF No. 19); and
6. Defendant's Pretrial Motion for Government Agents to Retain Rough Notes and Evidence (ECF No. 20).

         Based upon the record, memoranda, oral arguments of counsel, and the agreement of the parties as noted at the hearing and in their respective briefs, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

         1. The Government's Motion for Discovery (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED. The motion seeks discovery available under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 16(b), and 26.2. At the hearing, Defendant had no objection to the motion. Therefore, the Government's motion is granted; Defendant shall comply with his obligations under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. No. later than 30 days before trial, the parties shall make their respective expert disclosures. No. later than 10 days before trial, the parties shall make their respective rebuttal expert disclosures.

         2. Defendant's Motion for Pretrial Disclosure of 404 Evidence (ECF No. 15) is GRANTED as follows: Defendant requests that the Government “immediately disclose any ‘bad act' or ‘similar course of conduct' evidence it intends to offer at trial pursuant to Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.” The Government indicates it is aware of its obligations under Rule 404. (Gov't Resp. at 3, ECF No. 27). At the hearing, the parties agreed to a deadline of two weeks before trial for Rule 404(b) disclosures.

         Rule 404(b) requires the Government to provide reasonable notice before trial when evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act will be used to “prov[e] motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.” Fed.R.Evid. 404(b)(2). “Rule 404(b) . . . applies to the admission of wrongful-act evidence that is extrinsic to the charged offense; the rule does not prevent admission of other wrongful conduct that is intrinsic to the charged offense.” United States v. Ruiz-Chavez, 612 F.3d 983, 988 (8th Cir. 2010) (citations omitted). “Evidence of other wrongful conduct is considered intrinsic ...


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.