Project Types: Court Filings

CONCLUSION Based upon the foregoing, Mr. Drexler, Mr. Parker, Mr. Stewart, and Mr. Lovelien request this Honorable Court issue an order to dismiss. As FRCP 16 gives the Court the ability to fashion any order for a discovery violation, and this was a discovery violation, an order for dismissal is an appropriate remedy.

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT PARKER, DREXLER, AND STEWART’S EMERGENCY MOTION IN LIMINE (ECF No. 2059) 

DEFENDANT CLIVEN D. BUNDY’S REPLY TO THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS {ECF NO. 985) CLIVEN D. BUNDY, Defendant.

DEFENDANT RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT’S SEVERANCE PROPOSAL [Doc. 971] AND SUPPLEMENT TO HIS MOTION TO SEVER [Doc. 550] PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER [Doc. 978] ERIC PARKER, et al Defendants.

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT BUNDY’S MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT (ECF No. 892) CLIVEN D. BUNDY, Defendant.

ORDER (Mot. Suppl. Resp. – ECF No. 971) CLIVEN BUNDY, et al., defendants.

MOTION TO SUPPRESS UNMIRANDIZED TAPE RECORDED INTERVIEW OF DEFENDANT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENT CAPUTO THAT WAS THE PRODUCT OF PRIOR UNCONSTITUTIONAL INTERROGATION GREGORY P. BURLESON, Defendant.