U.S. v. CADDEN, 14-10363-RGS. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Massachusetts
Number: infdco20170322b71
Visitors: 13
Filed: Mar. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 21, 2017
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S EMAIL MOTION FOR FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTIONS RICHARD G. STEARNS , District Judge . The court will treat defendant's email of March 20, 2017, as a motion requesting further jury instructions. The motion is DENIED. The jurors have asked a very specific question limited to the identification of exhibit numbers associated with specific alleged acts of racketeering. They have not asked to have testimony read to them, or for the court to repeat instructions t
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S EMAIL MOTION FOR FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTIONS RICHARD G. STEARNS , District Judge . The court will treat defendant's email of March 20, 2017, as a motion requesting further jury instructions. The motion is DENIED. The jurors have asked a very specific question limited to the identification of exhibit numbers associated with specific alleged acts of racketeering. They have not asked to have testimony read to them, or for the court to repeat instructions th..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S EMAIL MOTION FOR FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTIONS
RICHARD G. STEARNS, District Judge.
The court will treat defendant's email of March 20, 2017, as a motion requesting further jury instructions. The motion is DENIED. The jurors have asked a very specific question limited to the identification of exhibit numbers associated with specific alleged acts of racketeering. They have not asked to have testimony read to them, or for the court to repeat instructions that it has already given (and that the jurors in any event have in writing with them in the jury room). Nor have they asked the court to give explanations that they have already heard. If and only when any of these things are asked for, will the court will respond. But not before. The lists of exhibit numbers provided by the government and the defendant will be combined into a single list without identifying which side made the selections. The combined list will be given to the jury with a written explanation from the court that these are the exhibit numbers provided by the parties whether they agreed or not as their particular relevance.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
