Filed: Nov. 29, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 29, 2017
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER TIMOTHY L. BROOKS , District Judge . Currently before the Court are the Government's First Motion in Limine (Doc. 160) and Brief in Support (Doc. 161), Defendant Randell G. Shelton's Response (Doc. 179), and Defendant Oren Paris III's Response (Doc. 180). The Government asks the Court to enter "an Order prohibiting the Defendants, their counsel, and any defense witnesses from asking any question, introducing any evidence, or making any statement regarding the following" f
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER TIMOTHY L. BROOKS , District Judge . Currently before the Court are the Government's First Motion in Limine (Doc. 160) and Brief in Support (Doc. 161), Defendant Randell G. Shelton's Response (Doc. 179), and Defendant Oren Paris III's Response (Doc. 180). The Government asks the Court to enter "an Order prohibiting the Defendants, their counsel, and any defense witnesses from asking any question, introducing any evidence, or making any statement regarding the following" fo..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
TIMOTHY L. BROOKS, District Judge.
Currently before the Court are the Government's First Motion in Limine (Doc. 160) and Brief in Support (Doc. 161), Defendant Randell G. Shelton's Response (Doc. 179), and Defendant Oren Paris III's Response (Doc. 180). The Government asks the Court to enter "an Order prohibiting the Defendants, their counsel, and any defense witnesses from asking any question, introducing any evidence, or making any statement regarding the following" four matters: (1) undisclosed defense exhibits, (2) references to potential punishment, (3) specific instances of good conduct, and (4) exculpatory hearsay. See Doc. 160, p. 1. The Government's Motion will be granted as to the latter three categories, because no Defendant has expressed any opposition to those requests.1
With respect to undisclosed defense exhibits, the Government contends that no Defendant has provided reciprocal discovery to the Government under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(b), and asks the Court to prohibit the Defendants "from introducing the undisclosed evidence" under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d)(2)(C). But Dr. Paris and Mr. Shelton indicate that they might seek to rely on exhibits that the Government produced to the Defendants in discovery. See Doc. 179, pp. 1-2; Doc. 180, pp. 1-2. It would be unreasonable to prohibit them from doing so simply because they never undertook the pointless formality of providing the Government with copies of materials that the Government had already provided to them. Since the relief sought on this particular matter by the Government is overbroad, the Government's request will be denied. The Government is free to object at trial to the admissibility of any particular exhibit that a Defendant might seek to offer, if the Government believes the exhibit at issue should be excluded under Rule 16(d)(2)(C). The Court will rule on any such objection at the time it is made, in light of the particular context for the exhibit at issue, but the Court will not enter a generic, across-the-board prohibition at this time.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Government's First Motion in Limine (Doc. 160) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as described above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
