U.S. v. Mota, 1:18-CR-0035 LJO. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190502c56
Visitors: 17
Filed: Apr. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER RE THE GOVERNMENT'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO OFFER EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT ADAMS' PRIOR FELONY CONVICTIONS LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . The Court has received and reviewed the Government's Notice of Intent to Offer Evidence of the Defendant's Prior Felony Conviction (Doc 85), as well as Defendant Adams' Opposition to it. (Doc. 90.) Should the Defendant choose not to testify, the matter becomes moot, and none of it will be admitted into evidence. However, should he decide to
Summary: ORDER RE THE GOVERNMENT'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO OFFER EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT ADAMS' PRIOR FELONY CONVICTIONS LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . The Court has received and reviewed the Government's Notice of Intent to Offer Evidence of the Defendant's Prior Felony Conviction (Doc 85), as well as Defendant Adams' Opposition to it. (Doc. 90.) Should the Defendant choose not to testify, the matter becomes moot, and none of it will be admitted into evidence. However, should he decide to t..
More
ORDER RE THE GOVERNMENT'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO OFFER EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT ADAMS' PRIOR FELONY CONVICTIONS
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, Chief District Judge.
The Court has received and reviewed the Government's Notice of Intent to Offer Evidence of the Defendant's Prior Felony Conviction (Doc 85), as well as Defendant Adams' Opposition to it. (Doc. 90.)
Should the Defendant choose not to testify, the matter becomes moot, and none of it will be admitted into evidence. However, should he decide to testify, the Court incorporates by reference the government's Notice of Intent (Doc 85) for its solid law and reasoning. The Defendant's opposition and objection to its use is overruled. That said, Counsel must meet and confer and advise the Court whether or not they are able to agree on how that information is offered for the jury to consider (i.e., whether a legal description that a felony of moral turpitude has been committed in a specific year, etc. is sufficient, or in the alternative something else is contemplated).
That issue will be discussed and, if counsel are unable to work it out, will be decided at 8:30 on Tuesday morning before the jury panel arrives for selection.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
