Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. LOPER, 2:14-cr-00321-GMN-NJK. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20160729b72 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jul. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Jul. 28, 2016
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is Defendant Justin Loper's motion to sever. Docket No. 178. Defendant asks the Court to sever his trial from the trial of his co-defendants because introduction of his co-defendants' post-arrest statements would violate his Constitutional right to a fair trial. Id. On July 8, 2016, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 14(b), the Court ordered the United States to provide to chambers, in camera, "an unredacted copy of each defenda
More

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant Justin Loper's motion to sever. Docket No. 178. Defendant asks the Court to sever his trial from the trial of his co-defendants because introduction of his co-defendants' post-arrest statements would violate his Constitutional right to a fair trial. Id.

On July 8, 2016, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 14(b), the Court ordered the United States to provide to chambers, in camera, "an unredacted copy of each defendant's statement, as well as a redacted copy of each defendant's statement that it intends to use in evidence at trial on the instant matter." Docket No. 196 at 2. The Court subsequently granted the parties' stipulation for extension of time, and ordered that the documents must be produced to chambers no later than July 27, 2016. Docket No. 202.

On July 27, 2016, the United States provided to chambers, for each co-defendant's statement, a full video recording of the statement, a full unredacted transcript of the statement, and a document wherein the United States set forth the specific times in each video that it intends to present to the jury. Contrary to the Court's prior order, the United States did not present a redacted statement for each codefendant — either in video or transcript form. It appears as if counsel for the United States determined that the Court, rather than the United States, should invest its time and resources in redacting the statements. The Court declines to do so.

The Court ORDERS the United States to comply in full with the Court's prior order, and provide to the undersigned's chambers, in camera, "an unredacted copy of each defendant's statement, as well as a redacted copy of each defendant's statement that it intends to use in evidence at trial on the instant matter." Docket No. 196 at 2. These statements shall be provided to chambers no later than August 2, 2016. Failure to comply with the Court's order may result in sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer