Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

PAUL K. CHARLTON United States Attorney District of Arizona RACHEL C. HERNANDEZ Arizona State Bar No. 016543 GARY M. RESTAINO Arizona State Bar No. 017450 Assistant U.S. Attorneys Two Renaissance Square 40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 Telephone (602) 514-7500 [email protected] [email protected]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Kindy Jonagan, Defendant. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT JONAGAN'S MOTION IN LIMINE (RE: EMPLOYMENT) CR04-0820-003-PHX-FJM

The United States, through counsel undersigned, responds to defendant Jonagan's Motion 17 in Limine. For the reasons set forth below, the Court should deny defendant's motion as 18 premature. 19 On November 8, 2004, in its first discovery disclosure letter, the government gave notice 20 of its intent to use other act evidence, 21 22 23 24 Discovery Letter, November 8, 2004. 25 Along with that letter the government provided all relevant discovery in its possession. Since 26 that time the government has continued to supply all relevant discovery to defendant in a timely 27 manner. 28 Pursuant to Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, I am providing or have provided you with any discovery in my possession (if any) related to other acts by any defendant which may be relevant to the actions of any defendant that resulted in the criminal charges in this case. This letter serves as notice of the government's intent to use this evidence at trial.

Case 2:04-cr-00820-FJM

Document 167

Filed 10/17/2005

Page 1 of 3

1

The Rule requires that the government shall, upon defendant's request, provide reasonable

2 notice in advance of trial, or during trial with the Court's permission, of any other act evidence 3 it intends to use at trial. Fed.R.Evid. 404(b). Reasonable notice is designed to reduce surprise 4 and promote early resolution of admissibility issues. United States v. Vega, 188 F.3d 1150, 5 1152, (9th Cir. 1999). 6 In addition to the initial letter providing notice, on September 30, 2005, undersigned

7 counsel informed defense counsel that it would be making final determinations regarding the use 8 of 404(b) evidence in the coming weeks. The government intends to formally and specifically 9 notify defendants and the Court on or before November 30, 2005 of what other act evidence it 10 intends to introduce at trial. This specific disclosure is more than two months in advance of the 11 trial date and will give ample time to resolve admissibility issues prior to trial. 12 It is entirely possible that the government may not seek to introduce the information

13 defendant seeks to preclude, however that determination is premature at this point. Similarly, 14 a ruling on the merits of this issue would be premature as well. The government requests that 15 the Court deny defendant's motion in limine as premature. The government further requests that 16 the parties be allowed to address this issue more fully when, and if, it becomes necessary upon 17 government's specific 404(b) notice. 18 // 19 // 20 // 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
2

Case 2:04-cr-00820-FJM

Document 167

Filed 10/17/2005

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Respectfully submitted this 17th day of October, 2005. PAUL K. CHARLTON United States Attorney District of Arizona s/ Rachel C. Hernandez RACHEL C. HERNANDEZ GARY M. RESTAINO Assistant U.S. Attorney

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this date, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic 12 Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Bruce Blumberg, Jeanette Alvarado, Ivan Mathew, Tom Hoidal, Greg Parzych and Michael Bresnehan. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
3

Case 2:04-cr-00820-FJM

Document 167

Filed 10/17/2005

Page 3 of 3