U.S. v. Stokes, 1:14-CR-290-1-TWT (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20181224880
Visitors: 9
Filed: Dec. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 20, 2018
Summary: ORDER THOMAS W. THRASH, JR. , District Judge . This is a criminal action. It is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 205] of the Magistrate Judge recommending denying the Defendant TaShawna Stokes' Motion for Bill of Particulars [Doc. 193] and granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony [Doc. 191]. The Defendants' Objections are without merit. For the reasons set forth in the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation,
Summary: ORDER THOMAS W. THRASH, JR. , District Judge . This is a criminal action. It is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 205] of the Magistrate Judge recommending denying the Defendant TaShawna Stokes' Motion for Bill of Particulars [Doc. 193] and granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony [Doc. 191]. The Defendants' Objections are without merit. For the reasons set forth in the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, ..
More
ORDER
THOMAS W. THRASH, JR., District Judge.
This is a criminal action. It is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 205] of the Magistrate Judge recommending denying the Defendant TaShawna Stokes' Motion for Bill of Particulars [Doc. 193] and granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony [Doc. 191]. The Defendants' Objections are without merit. For the reasons set forth in the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, the Government complied with Rule 16(a)(1)(G) with respect to the expert disclosures of Dr. Theodore Parran. Dr. Parran's expert report sufficiently established that his opinions were reliable as required by Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. No Daubert hearing was necessary. No disclosure of the investigative report of Dr. Parran's billing practices was required, although counsel for the Defendants may request an in camera inspection by the District Judge at trial. The Defendant TaShawna Stokes' Motion for Bill of Particulars [Doc. 193] is DENIED. The Defendants' Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony [Doc. 191] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
