{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "14",
    "document_number": "1:21-cr-02949-MV Document 30802 Filed 02/06/23 Page 14 of 16",
    "date": null,
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "decision. First, the government represents that, per the United States Marshal's Service, \"the interview room at the courthouse can be made available for [Mr. Robertson] to meet with his attorneys to prepare for trial, for unlimited meetings and unlimited durations of meetings during business hours, excepting only times when the Aspen courtroom is in use.\" Doc. 298 at 2. There is a catch, however: \"There is a screen in the interview room, which will allow for appropriate social distancing between [Mr. Robertson] and his lawyers.\" Id. Second, the government represents that \"the Santa Fe jail is willing to provide an exception to the policy barring in-person attorney visits, and will work to accommodate in-person visits between Robertson and his attorneys.\" Id.\n\nWhile the Court appreciates the government's effort in gathering information on these alternatives, they do not change its decision on release. First, the Court notes that the government could have, and should have, presented this information earlier if it wanted the Court to rely on these alternatives to deny release. Mr. Robertson filed his motion for reconsideration on December 21, 2020. Doc. 274. The government had a month and a half to investigate alternatives and make its argument against release. It cannot wait until an unfavorable ruling to present additional evidence that it was capable of presenting in the first instance. A motion for reconsideration is for presenting new evidence that was \"previously unavailable.\" Servants of Paraclete, 204 F.3d at 1012.\n\nSecond, the proposed alternatives are inadequate to address the trial preparation concerns the Court has articulated. The proposal to use the interview room at the Santa Fe courthouse is inadequate because the room, by the government's own description, will still contain a \"screen\" between Mr. Robertson and his attorneys. For all of the reasons set forth above, the defense team cannot effectively prepare for trial if they cannot sit next to Mr. Robertson and go over documents\n\n14\n\nDOJ-OGR-00001304",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "decision. First, the government represents that, per the United States Marshal's Service, \"the interview room at the courthouse can be made available for [Mr. Robertson] to meet with his attorneys to prepare for trial, for unlimited meetings and unlimited durations of meetings during business hours, excepting only times when the Aspen courtroom is in use.\" Doc. 298 at 2. There is a catch, however: \"There is a screen in the interview room, which will allow for appropriate social distancing between [Mr. Robertson] and his lawyers.\" Id. Second, the government represents that \"the Santa Fe jail is willing to provide an exception to the policy barring in-person attorney visits, and will work to accommodate in-person visits between Robertson and his attorneys.\" Id.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "While the Court appreciates the government's effort in gathering information on these alternatives, they do not change its decision on release. First, the Court notes that the government could have, and should have, presented this information earlier if it wanted the Court to rely on these alternatives to deny release. Mr. Robertson filed his motion for reconsideration on December 21, 2020. Doc. 274. The government had a month and a half to investigate alternatives and make its argument against release. It cannot wait until an unfavorable ruling to present additional evidence that it was capable of presenting in the first instance. A motion for reconsideration is for presenting new evidence that was \"previously unavailable.\" Servants of Paraclete, 204 F.3d at 1012.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Second, the proposed alternatives are inadequate to address the trial preparation concerns the Court has articulated. The proposal to use the interview room at the Santa Fe courthouse is inadequate because the room, by the government's own description, will still contain a \"screen\" between Mr. Robertson and his attorneys. For all of the reasons set forth above, the defense team cannot effectively prepare for trial if they cannot sit next to Mr. Robertson and go over documents",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "14",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001304",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Robertson"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States Marshal's Service",
      "Santa Fe jail"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Aspen",
      "Santa Fe"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "December 21, 2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Doc. 298",
      "Doc. 274",
      "204 F.3d at 1012",
      "DOJ-OGR-00001304"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Mr. Robertson. The text discusses the government's proposals for accommodating the defendant's trial preparation and the court's decision regarding release. The document is well-formatted and free of significant damage or redactions."
}