United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
June 8, 2005.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BOBBY SHARP, Defendant.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: JAMES MORAN, Senior District Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Bobby Sharp has filed eleven pretrial motions. The
government has responded. This case has all the earmarks of being
essentially an open-file case. We deal with each of the motions
(1) Motion for disclosure of impeaching or otherwise
exculpatory information and evidence. The government recognizes
its obligation to disclose such information and is prepared to do
so should any such evidence arise. That is sufficient. The motion
is denied as moot.
(2) Motion for pretrial production of Jencks Act material. The
court cannot order the pretrial disclosure of that material,
although pretrial disclosure greatly facilitates trial. The
government has agreed to provide any such material one week
before trial, so long as defendant likewise agrees to provide any
statements or reports relating to defense witnesses one week
prior to trial as well. That motion is denied.
(3) Motion to require the government to make a Santiago proffer
statement. The government responds that it has not yet determined
what co-conspirator statements it intends to rely upon at trial.
If the government is going to rely upon co-conspirator
statements, the government should make a Santiago proffer statement two weeks
prior to trial.
(4) Motion for discovery and preservation of agents' notes. The
government has already agreed to do so and thus the motion is
denied as moot.
(5) Motion for production of informants. The government has
advised that there were no informants and therefore the motion is
denied as moot.
(6) Motion for pretrial list of witnesses. The government
agrees to file a witness list according to a schedule set by the
court. The court directs that the list be provided two weeks
before trial and that the order of testimony be provided two days
in advance of a witness' testimony. While we recognize that the
defendant cannot know with any certainty whom he may call as
witnesses prior to knowing whom the government intends to call,
and what develops during trial, we do direct the defendant to
keep the government advised of whom he intends to call when a
decision to call the witness is made.
(7) Motion compelling immediate disclosure of existence and
substance of promises of immunity, leniency or preferential
treatment. The government agrees to disclose any such promises
that may be made. We direct that it do so at the time it
furnishes its list of witnesses.
(8) Motion reserving the right to file supporting memoranda
and/or additional motions. That is granted.
(9) Motion for an order requiring disclosure of expert
testimony. The government advises that it has retained no experts
and has no present intention to rely on expert testimony in this
case. It agrees, however, to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 16(a)(1)(G) if it should change its mind. The motion is
denied, therefore, as moot.
(10) Motion to adopt motions of co-defendant. The co-defendant
has filed no pretrial motions and the motion is therefore denied
as moot. (11) Motion for early return on trial subpoenas and issuance
thereof in forma pauperis. That motion is granted. Defendant
shall promptly provide the government with whatever material he
receives by use of such subpoenas, and the government is directed
to do the same.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.