United States v. Edge
| Decision Date | 03 November 2014 |
| Docket Number | CRIMINAL No. 14-201 (MJD/TNL) |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY DOANE EDGE and DEBORAH SUSAN EDGE, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
ORDER ON PRETRIAL MOTIONS
Katherine T. Buzicky, Assistant United States Attorneys, United States Attorney's Office, 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55415, for the Government;
Robert W. Owens, Jr., Owens Law, L.L.C., 5270 West 84th Street, Suite 300, Bloomington, MN 55437, for Defendant Anthony Doane Edge; and
Manvir K. Atwal, Office of the Federal Defender, 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 107, Minneapolis, MN 55415, for Defendant Deborah Susan Edge.
This matter is before the Court, United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung, on the following Motions:
3. Defendant's Motions for Discovery and Inspection (ECF Nos. 39, 64);
6. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion for Disclosure of Jencks Act Material (ECF No. 42);
7. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion for Disclosure of post Conspiracy Statements of Co-Defendants (ECF No. 43);
8. Defendants' Motion for Discovery of Expert Under Rule 16(a)(1)(G) (ECF No. 65) and Motion for Disclosure of Expert Witness Testimony (ECF No. 44);
9. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to produce Grand Jury Testimony (ECF No. 45);
10. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to Compel Production of Guideline Sentencing Information (ECF No. 46);
11. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to Sever Counts (ECF No. 48);
12. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to Sever Defendant (ECF No. 49);
13. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to Exclude Evidence of Other Crimes (ECF No. 50);
14. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion for Counsel to Participate in Voir Dire (ECF No 51); and
15. Defendant Deborah Edge's Motion for Bill of Particulars (ECF No. 62).
On September 2, 2014, the Court held hearings on the aforementioned Motions. After the hearings, the parties provided written submissions to the Court. Assistant United States Attorney Katherine Buzicky appeared at the hearing on behalf of the Government. Robert W. Owens, Jr., appeared on behalf of Defendant Anthony Edge. Manny Atwal appeared on behalf of Defendant Deborah Edge.
Based upon the record, memoranda, and oral arguments of counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Government's Motions for Discovery (ECF No. 22, 23) will be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: The Motions seek discovery available under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 16(b), and 26.2. The Motions are GRANTED IN PART, and to the extent that they have not already done so, Defendants shall provide the Government with the requested materials under the Federal Rules. To the extent that such information has already been provided, the Motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
2. Defendants' Motions for Disclosure of Rule 404 Evidence (ECF Nos. 41, 61) are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: Defendants seeks immediate disclosure of any evidence that the Government intends to offer at trial under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). The Government acknowledges its discovery obligations under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) and advises that it intends to comply fully with those obligations.
The Government objects, however, to immediate disclosure of such evidence and to the extent that it is required to provide notice that it intends to use such evidence as "intrinsic" evidence. See United States v. Ruiz-Chavez, 612 F.3d 983, 988 (8th Cir. 2010) . "Rule 404(b) . . . applies to the admission of wrongful-act evidence that is extrinsic to the charged offense." Id. It does not apply to intrinsic evidence. Id.; see also United States v. Beltz, 385 F.3d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir. 2004) (). Therefore, 14 days prior to trial, the Government shall provide "reasonable notice" of all "extrinsic" evidence that the Government intends to offer that is within the purview of Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).
3. Defendants' Motion for Discovery and Inspection (ECF Nos. 39, 64) shall be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED AS MOOT IN PART as follows: The Government represents that it has satisfied its discovery obligations by disclosing all known, relevant information in its control to Defendant. Accordingly, to the extent that the Government has produced responsive information, Defendant's Motions are DENIED AS MOOT. The Government acknowledges its discovery obligations, and advises the Court that it has and will comply with its obligations under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, 14 days prior to trial, the Government shall disclose to Defendant all available evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. To the extent that any other responsive information remains in the Government's control and has not yet been produced, the Motions are GRANTED.
4. Defendants' Motion for Release of Brady Materials (ECF No. 40) and Motion to Compel Attorney for the Government to Disclose Evidence Favorable to the Defendant (ECF No. 63) will be GRANTED as follows: The Government is aware of its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373, U.S. 83 (1963), Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and their progeny. The Government shall continue to comply fully with Brady, Giglio, and their progeny, and disclose all exculpatory evidence.
5. Defendants' Motions to Retain Rough Notes and Evidence (ECF Nos. 47, 67) will be GRANTED as follows: Defendants' Motions seek an order directing the Governmentto direct all of its agents involved in this case to preserve any rough notes pertaining to this case, in whatever form they may exist. The Government does not oppose the Motions and agrees to instruct agents to preserve rough notes. The Government shall direct its agents involved in this case to preserve any rough notes pertaining to this case.
6. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion for Disclosure of Jencks Act Materials (ECF No. 42) will be DENIED as follows: Defendant's Motion seeks disclosure of all material required under the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500, at least two weeks before trial. The Government objects to the Motion. Indeed, courts may not order the pretrial disclosure of Jencks Act materials. See, e.g., United States v. White, 750 F.2d 726 (8th Cir. 1984). Although the Government may not be required by the Court to disclose Jencks Act material before trial, it has represented that it intends to disclose such materials one week before trial. In light of this representation, the Court will DENY the Motion.
7. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to Disclose Post-Conspiracy Statements of Co-Defendant (ECF No. 43) will be DENIED AS MOOT in part and DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Defendant Anthony Edge seeks an order compelling the Government to provide "notice and disclosure of intent to use or refer to, and/or introduce into evidence at trial the statements or confessions of any defendant or unindicted co-conspirator, together with a designation [of] which statement or confessions the government plans to so utilize" and granting leave to file "motions for severance, suppressions, and/or in limine as indicated by the government's response and a review of the relevant Bruton materials." (ECF No. 43.) To the extent that the requested statements encompass exculpatory or impeaching Brady materials or Jencks Act materials, they shall beproduced in accordance with this Order as set forth above, and the Motion is DENIED AS MOOT. To the extent that Defendant's Motion seeks statements beyond those that encompass Brady or Jencks materials, the determination of how best to redact the statements to prevent prejudice as discussed in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (1968), is an issue the trial judge. See Richardson v. Marsh, 481 U.S. 200, 208 (1987) (). Accordingly, as it relates to any co-defendant's statements beyond those that encompass Brady or Jencks materials, the Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
8. Defendants' Motions for Discovery and Inspection (ECF No. 39, 64), Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion for Disclosure of Expert Witness Testimony (ECF No. 44), and Defendant Deborah Edge's Motion for Discovery of Expert (ECF No. 65) shall be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED AS MOOT IN PART as follows: To the extent that the Government has produced responsive information, Defendant's Motions are DENIED AS MOOT. The Government acknowledges its discovery obligations, and advises the Court that it has and will comply with its obligations under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, 14 days prior to trial, the Government shall disclose to Defendant all available evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. To the extent that any other responsive information remains in the Government's control and has not yet been produced, the Motions are GRANTED.
9. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to produce Grand Jury Testimony (ECF No. 45) will be DENIED as follows: Defendant seeks the Grand Jury testimony of anywitness who will testify at the suppression hearing. No witness who testified at the suppression hearing testified to the Grand Jury. Accordingly, the Motion is DENIED.
10. Defendant Anthony Edge's Motion to Compel Production of Guideline Sentencing Information (ECF No. 46) will be DENIED as follows: Defendant seeks an order compelling the Government to produce "Guideline Sentencing material." Defendant fails, however, to provide any constitutional or statutory...
To continue reading
Request your trial