{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "14 of 16",
    "document_number": "146",
    "date": "02/04/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 146 Filed 02/04/21 Page 14 of 16\n\nII. In the Alternative, the Government Should Be Required to Demonstrate the Admissibility of Evidence Regarding Accuser-3 Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).\n\nAt a minimum, the government should not be permitted to use the allegations regarding Accuser-3 to perform an end-run around Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). Rather, the government should be required to demonstrate the admissibility under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) of any evidence regarding Accuser-3.\n\nFed. R. Evid. 404(b) \"governs the admissibility of evidence of prior or subsequent 'bad acts'—evidence of 'crimes, wrongs, or acts' other than those charged in the indictment.\" United States v. Curley, 639 F.3d 50, 56 (2d Cir. 2011) (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)). \"The rule prohibits the admission of such evidence if it 'prove[s] the character of a person' to show his propensity to commit the charged act, but permits its admission for other purposes.\" Id. (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)). Permissible purposes include \"proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.\" Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2). In a criminal case, the rule obligates a prosecutor to (i) \"provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it\"; (ii) \"articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose\"; and (iii) \"do so in writing before trial\" unless excused by the court. Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(3).\n\nAs shown above, evidence regarding Accuser-3 is irrelevant to the conspiracy counts. Thus, to the extent that the government intends to introduce evidence regarding Accuser-3, such evidence is \"other acts\" evidence, and its admissibility should be litigated under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).\n\n10\n\nDOJ-OGR-00002689",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 146 Filed 02/04/21 Page 14 of 16",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "II. In the Alternative, the Government Should Be Required to Demonstrate the Admissibility of Evidence Regarding Accuser-3 Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "At a minimum, the government should not be permitted to use the allegations regarding Accuser-3 to perform an end-run around Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). Rather, the government should be required to demonstrate the admissibility under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) of any evidence regarding Accuser-3.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) \"governs the admissibility of evidence of prior or subsequent 'bad acts'—evidence of 'crimes, wrongs, or acts' other than those charged in the indictment.\" United States v. Curley, 639 F.3d 50, 56 (2d Cir. 2011) (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)). \"The rule prohibits the admission of such evidence if it 'prove[s] the character of a person' to show his propensity to commit the charged act, but permits its admission for other purposes.\" Id. (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)). Permissible purposes include \"proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.\" Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2). In a criminal case, the rule obligates a prosecutor to (i) \"provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it\"; (ii) \"articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose\"; and (iii) \"do so in writing before trial\" unless excused by the court. Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(3).",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "As shown above, evidence regarding Accuser-3 is irrelevant to the conspiracy counts. Thus, to the extent that the government intends to introduce evidence regarding Accuser-3, such evidence is \"other acts\" evidence, and its admissibility should be litigated under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "10",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002689",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "02/04/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 146",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002689"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing the admissibility of evidence under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes."
}