mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00006765.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "57",
    "document_number": "452",
    "date": "11/12/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 452 Filed 11/12/21 Page 57 of 84\n\nGovernment planned to offer at trial as admissions of a defendant\" under Fed. R. Evid. 801). Accordingly, the Government argued that \"the defense will receive notice of any co-conspirator statements that the Government may seek to introduce through witness statements\" in its Jencks Act production. (Gov't Opp. at 192, Dkt. No. 204).\n\nThe Court denied the motion, explaining that the Court lacked the power to order pretrial disclosure of non-exculpatory co-conspirator statements. (Op. & Order at 30, Dkt. No. 207). The Court also explained that the \"[c]o-conspirator statements may often be admitted at trial on a conditional basis,\" and to the extent that \"can pose a problem, a pretrial hearing is unnecessary here because the Government has committed to producing co-conspirator statements at least six weeks in advance of trial to allow Maxwell to raise any objections.\" (Id. at 30-31).\n\nThe defendant's second bite at the apple came in the parties' joint scheduling letter. (Letter, Dkt. No. 291). There, the defense requested that the Government \"identify any co-conspirator's names and statements (whether via witness testimony or documentary evidence) at the same time as it discloses []3500 material,\" so it could \"litigate their admissibility before trial.\" (Id. at 11-12). The Government responded that it is \"entirely appropriate for defense counsel to receive notice of any co-conspirator statements through Jencks Act materials and marked exhibits,\" because any co-conspirator statements will be contained therein. (Id. at 5). The Government also noted that the defendant cited no cases \"directing separate notice of cosconspirator statements that the Government may introduce at trial.\" (Id.)\n\nOn June 2, 2021, the Court adopted the \"Government's proposal\" and set a deadline of October 11, 2021, for the \"disclosure of Jencks Act and Giglio material, Rule 404(b) evidence and\n\n56\n\nDOJ-OGR-00006765",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 452 Filed 11/12/21 Page 57 of 84",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Government planned to offer at trial as admissions of a defendant\" under Fed. R. Evid. 801). Accordingly, the Government argued that \"the defense will receive notice of any co-conspirator statements that the Government may seek to introduce through witness statements\" in its Jencks Act production. (Gov't Opp. at 192, Dkt. No. 204).\n\nThe Court denied the motion, explaining that the Court lacked the power to order pretrial disclosure of non-exculpatory co-conspirator statements. (Op. & Order at 30, Dkt. No. 207). The Court also explained that the \"[c]o-conspirator statements may often be admitted at trial on a conditional basis,\" and to the extent that \"can pose a problem, a pretrial hearing is unnecessary here because the Government has committed to producing co-conspirator statements at least six weeks in advance of trial to allow Maxwell to raise any objections.\" (Id. at 30-31).\n\nThe defendant's second bite at the apple came in the parties' joint scheduling letter. (Letter, Dkt. No. 291). There, the defense requested that the Government \"identify any co-conspirator's names and statements (whether via witness testimony or documentary evidence) at the same time as it discloses []3500 material,\" so it could \"litigate their admissibility before trial.\" (Id. at 11-12). The Government responded that it is \"entirely appropriate for defense counsel to receive notice of any co-conspirator statements through Jencks Act materials and marked exhibits,\" because any co-conspirator statements will be contained therein. (Id. at 5). The Government also noted that the defendant cited no cases \"directing separate notice of cosconspirator statements that the Government may introduce at trial.\" (Id.)\n\nOn June 2, 2021, the Court adopted the \"Government's proposal\" and set a deadline of October 11, 2021, for the \"disclosure of Jencks Act and Giglio material, Rule 404(b) evidence and",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "56",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006765",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Government",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "June 2, 2021",
      "October 11, 2021",
      "11/12/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 452",
      "Dkt. No. 204",
      "Dkt. No. 207",
      "Dkt. No. 291",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006765"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content or stamps visible. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}