{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "351",
    "date": "10/15/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 351 Filed 10/15/21 Page 2 of 4\nPage 2\nand must “do so at least 14 days before trial unless the court, for good cause, sets a different time.” Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(1)(B) (emphasis added). This language plainly gives the Court authority to set a “different” time, not necessarily a “later” time, to require the defense to file a Rule 412 motion. See, e.g., Order, United States v. Andrews, No. 19 Cr. 131 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2020) (Dkt. No. 287) (setting a Rule 412 deadline of February 13, 2020, for a March 9, 2020 trial); Order, United States v. Rivera, No. 19 Cr. 131 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 29, 2020) (Dkt. No. 384) (setting a Rule 412 deadline of October 15, 2020, for a November 9, 2020 trial); United States v. Dupigny, 18 Cr. 528 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 2019) (Dkt. No. 202) (requiring a “finalized proffer of evidence” the defense sought to admit under Rule 412 by December 6, 2019, in advance of a January 13, 2020 trial); United States v. Backman, 817 F.3d 662, 669–70 (9th Cir. 2016) (concluding that district court did not abuse its discretion when setting Rule 412 deadline more than 14 days before trial and denying request to amend the motion less than 14 days before trial); United States v. Valenzuela, No. Cr. 07–11, 2008 WL 2824958, at *4 n.12 (C.D. Cal. July 21, 2008) (“Good cause exists to advance the deadline for filing a Rule 412(c) motion by eleven days given the complex nature of the action and the volume of evidence that will likely be presented at trial.”); see also Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, 23 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Evid. § 5377 (2d ed. 2020) (explaining that the text of Rule 412(c)(1)(B) “suggests that the court might require that the motion be filed earlier than 14 days before trial or might permit the motion to be brought later, including during trial.”). Accordingly, the Government respectfully submits that the express terms of Rule 412 contemplate that the Court can set an earlier briefing schedule.\nA deadline more than two weeks in advance of trial is consistent with the Rule’s procedural requirements. Before admitting evidence under Rule 412, the Court “must conduct an in camera hearing and give the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard.” Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(2).\nDOJ-OGR-00005238",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 351 Filed 10/15/21 Page 2 of 4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Page 2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "and must “do so at least 14 days before trial unless the court, for good cause, sets a different time.” Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(1)(B) (emphasis added). This language plainly gives the Court authority to set a “different” time, not necessarily a “later” time, to require the defense to file a Rule 412 motion. See, e.g., Order, United States v. Andrews, No. 19 Cr. 131 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2020) (Dkt. No. 287) (setting a Rule 412 deadline of February 13, 2020, for a March 9, 2020 trial); Order, United States v. Rivera, No. 19 Cr. 131 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 29, 2020) (Dkt. No. 384) (setting a Rule 412 deadline of October 15, 2020, for a November 9, 2020 trial); United States v. Dupigny, 18 Cr. 528 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 2019) (Dkt. No. 202) (requiring a “finalized proffer of evidence” the defense sought to admit under Rule 412 by December 6, 2019, in advance of a January 13, 2020 trial); United States v. Backman, 817 F.3d 662, 669–70 (9th Cir. 2016) (concluding that district court did not abuse its discretion when setting Rule 412 deadline more than 14 days before trial and denying request to amend the motion less than 14 days before trial); United States v. Valenzuela, No. Cr. 07–11, 2008 WL 2824958, at *4 n.12 (C.D. Cal. July 21, 2008) (“Good cause exists to advance the deadline for filing a Rule 412(c) motion by eleven days given the complex nature of the action and the volume of evidence that will likely be presented at trial.”); see also Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, 23 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Evid. § 5377 (2d ed. 2020) (explaining that the text of Rule 412(c)(1)(B) “suggests that the court might require that the motion be filed earlier than 14 days before trial or might permit the motion to be brought later, including during trial.”). Accordingly, the Government respectfully submits that the express terms of Rule 412 contemplate that the Court can set an earlier briefing schedule.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A deadline more than two weeks in advance of trial is consistent with the Rule’s procedural requirements. Before admitting evidence under Rule 412, the Court “must conduct an in camera hearing and give the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard.” Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(2).",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005238",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Andrews",
      "Rivera",
      "Dupigny",
      "Backman",
      "Valenzuela",
      "Charles Alan Wright",
      "Arthur R. Miller"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court",
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y.",
      "C.D. Cal.",
      "N.Y.",
      "Cal."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "January 29, 2020",
      "February 13, 2020",
      "March 9, 2020",
      "April 29, 2020",
      "October 15, 2020",
      "November 9, 2020",
      "October 23, 2019",
      "December 6, 2019",
      "January 13, 2020",
      "July 21, 2008",
      "October 15, 2021"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 351",
      "19 Cr. 131",
      "Dkt. No. 287",
      "Dkt. No. 384",
      "18 Cr. 528",
      "Dkt. No. 202",
      "No. Cr. 07–11",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005238"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing the rules of evidence and procedure. The text is well-formatted and printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document includes citations to various court cases and legal references."
}