Filed: May 16, 2017
Latest Update: May 16, 2017
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT BARRY CADDEN'S MOTION TO COMPEL, PRESERVE, OR COMPLETE THE TRIAL RECORD [DKT #1008] RICHARD G. STEARNS , District Judge . As ordered by the court, the government has produced the disputed binder of compiled test result exhibits and a copy of the PowerPoint presentation used in closing argument. I have examined the binder and find that it consists of only properly admitted exhibits at trial (namely Exhibits 1956, 1191, 1190, 819, 396, 399, 862, 842, 891, 829
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT BARRY CADDEN'S MOTION TO COMPEL, PRESERVE, OR COMPLETE THE TRIAL RECORD [DKT #1008] RICHARD G. STEARNS , District Judge . As ordered by the court, the government has produced the disputed binder of compiled test result exhibits and a copy of the PowerPoint presentation used in closing argument. I have examined the binder and find that it consists of only properly admitted exhibits at trial (namely Exhibits 1956, 1191, 1190, 819, 396, 399, 862, 842, 891, 829,..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT BARRY CADDEN'S MOTION TO COMPEL, PRESERVE, OR COMPLETE THE TRIAL RECORD [DKT #1008]
RICHARD G. STEARNS, District Judge.
As ordered by the court, the government has produced the disputed binder of compiled test result exhibits and a copy of the PowerPoint presentation used in closing argument. I have examined the binder and find that it consists of only properly admitted exhibits at trial (namely Exhibits 1956, 1191, 1190, 819, 396, 399, 862, 842, 891, 829, 408, 835, 902, and 582, in that order).1 As for the PowerPoint presentation, it is a perfectly acceptable Rule 611(a) pedagogical aid supporting the government's closing argument. As the court observed in its January 31, 2017 ruling on the pertinent motion in limine:
While a Rule 1006 chart is typically admitted in evidence, a Rule 611(a) pedagogical device distilling and simplifying complex data to aid counsel's argument to the jury is not. See United States v. Milkiewicz, 470 F.3d [390,] 397 [(1st Cir. 2006)]. The difference, as explained in [United States v. Bray, 139 F.3d 1104 (6th Cir. 1998)], is that charts admitted under Rule 1006 are explicitly intended to reflect the contents of the documents they summarize, and typically are substitutes in evidence for the voluminous originals, while Rule 611(a) pedagogical aids are intended to illustrate or clarify a party's position and may by way of captions or method of organization permissibly promote the inferences and conclusions the proponent seeks to draw from the evidence. 139 F.3d at 1111; cf. United States v. Johnson, 54 F.3d 1150, 1157-1161 (4th Cir. 1995) (summary testimony and charts allowed in a complex drug trial as a permissible "pedagogical device" under Fed. R. Evid. 611(a)).
The court will order the Clerk to include the binder and presentation in the record of the trial, but at present intends to deny the motion for a judgment of acquittal or for a new trial to the extent it is based on any alleged government misconduct regarding these two items.2
ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, the Clerk will incorporate the binder and PowerPoint presentation in the record of the trial for purposes of appeal, if any.
SO ORDERED.
