Project Types: Court Filings

Case 2:16-cr-00046-GMN-PAL Document 1568 Filed 02/10/17 Page 1 – 2

ORDER (Mot for Group Visits – ECF No. 1497) Legal Counsel Access Denied Attorneys cannot meet with defendants as a group… Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen denied Eric Parker’s motion (ECF No. 1497) to facilitate open air group meetings between defendants and their legal counsel. Citing lack of communication with the US Marshals Service, Leen determined that the request was not specific enough for the Court to be able to assess whether or not the request is reasonable. Absent a special request, the facilities at Henderson Detention Center do not provide for an environment where multiple attorneys can meet with […]

Continue reading

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 1867 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 – 3

AFFIDAVIT OF FBI SPECIAL AGENT KATHERINE ARMSTRONG IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SUPPRESS

Continue reading

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 1866 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1- 3

AFFIDAVIT OF FBI SPECIAL AGENT TODD T. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SUPPRESS

Continue reading

Case 2:16-cr-00046-GMN-PAL Document 1539 Filed 02/07/17 Page 1 – 5

Court Sidesteps Defendant’s Rights… will fully protect and conceal identify of FBI undercover employeeChief Judge Gloria Navarro ruled in favor of the Government in their motion to place a protective order on the identity of an FBI undercover employee (UCE). Defendants argued that this constitutes a violation of Brady / Giglio material rights (see explanation here). Navarro found that the identity protection for the UCE outweighs the rights of defendants. Effectively, the court sidesteps defendant’s rights.Extraordinary measure?Not only is the identity of the UCE under general protective order, it is also not available to defendants or their counsel. The UCE will testify under the pseudonym […]

Continue reading

Case 2:16-cr-00046-GMN-PAL Document 1528 Filed 02/06/17 Page 1 – 3

Trial Day 1: Monday, 06 February 2017Jury Selection…Jury selection began today. Six defendants and five attorneys (Todd Engel proceeds pro se) questioned potential jurors on a wide range of issues related to the case. Jurors were promptly eliminated indicating that if the second pool moves as quickly as the first, opening arguments could begin as early as Wednesday.The Government’s questions…The Government asked jurors if they had any strong feelings for or against law enforcement. Jurors were questioned as to whether or not they would have any issue finding a defendant guilty related to using a weapon in a crime of […]

Continue reading