Filed: Jul. 15, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 15, 2014
Summary: ORDER MARK A. GOLDSMITH, District Judge. As discussed on the record outside the presence of the jury in the above-captioned matter on July 11, 2014, July 14, 2014, and July 15, 2014, and recognizing that this case may be submitted to the jury by Friday, July 18, 2014, the Court hereby orders as follows: • The Government provided a copy of its motion for the admission of coconspirator statements to the Court and opposing counsel on Sunday, July 13, 2014, and it formally filed the motion on Ju
Summary: ORDER MARK A. GOLDSMITH, District Judge. As discussed on the record outside the presence of the jury in the above-captioned matter on July 11, 2014, July 14, 2014, and July 15, 2014, and recognizing that this case may be submitted to the jury by Friday, July 18, 2014, the Court hereby orders as follows: • The Government provided a copy of its motion for the admission of coconspirator statements to the Court and opposing counsel on Sunday, July 13, 2014, and it formally filed the motion on Jul..
More
ORDER
MARK A. GOLDSMITH, District Judge.
As discussed on the record outside the presence of the jury in the above-captioned matter on July 11, 2014, July 14, 2014, and July 15, 2014, and recognizing that this case may be submitted to the jury by Friday, July 18, 2014, the Court hereby orders as follows:
• The Government provided a copy of its motion for the admission of coconspirator statements to the Court and opposing counsel on Sunday, July 13, 2014, and it formally filed the motion on July 14, 2014 (Dkt. 694). To the extent Defendants want to respond to the motion, they must file their response by 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 15, 2014.
• The parties shall endeavor to agree upon a verdict form for the jury to use. The Government has already submitted its proposal to the Court. If the parties are unable to agree on a verdict form — the Government's proposal or otherwise — Defendants must submit their proposal to the Court on or before 11:59 p.m. on July 15, 2014.
• As discussed on the record before trial on July 11, 2014, Defendant Gills withdraws his first amended motion to allow defense witness testimony (Dkt. 678).
• Before trial on July 14, 2014, Defendant Norwood, through counsel, made an oral motion renewing his previous motion to sever his trial from that of Gills; all of the other Defendants — except Gills — joined in the motion. For the reasons stated on the record on July 14, 2014, the Court denies that oral motion.
• Defendant Jonathan Walker, through counsel, has suggested that some of the dates contained within Defendants' motion for judgment of acquittal are incorrect (Dkt. 691). Defendants must submit either a notice of errata or an amended motion for judgment of acquittal — with only these inaccuracies corrected — on or before 7:00 p.m. on July 15, 2014; and
• Defendant Oldham, through counsel, e-mailed to court staff, the Government, and co-Defendants' counsel a motion for admission of certain evidence on July 9, 2014. In his email, Oldham's counsel asked that the motion be filed under seal given purported concerns of a witness, who was discussed within the motion. However, Oldham never provided the Court with a formal motion to seal or a proposed order on sealing. As stated on the record on July 15, 2014, Oldham has withdrawn the motion and, therefore, it will not be filed on the docket — under seal or otherwise. The same goes for the Government's response to the motion, which was similarly e-mailed to court staff and Defendants' counsel.
SO ORDERED.
