Important Case Documents

ORDER: Following review of the parties' submission at 1253 and the Government's supplement at 1254 , the Court hereby provides notice to the parties that it intends to utilize the process proposed by the Government at Paragraph 9(a), and that it will not utilize the process outlined by the Defense at Paragraph 9(b). The Court intends to resolve all issues while the potential jurors are present on May 25, 2023. Signed by Judge Robert J. Colville on 5/23/23. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (Doc. No. 1255)

ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion for Reconsideration filed by the Defense at 1257 , it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is denied. The Defense requests that the Court reconsider its decision to utilize the process proposed by the Government at Paragraph 9(a) of 1253, and to not adopt the proposal raised by the Defense at Paragraph 9(b), which the Court notes was raised, for the first time, 48 hours before the peremptory strike process is scheduled to take place. In its Motion for Reconsideration, the Defense asserts that it requires additional time to review voir dire transcripts. The parties were provided with transcripts of the voir dire process at the conclusion of each day of individual questioning, which concluded one full week ago on 5/17/23. The Court ruled quickly, if not summarily, on the issue presented by the Defense at 1253 so that the Defense was on full, and nearly immediate, notice of the procedure the Court intends to utilize. The Court trusts that both the Government and Defense legal teams, each composed of highly capable attorneys, are capable of adequate review of the relevant questionnaires and transcripts, which were produced nearly contemporaneously during the voir dire process, ahead of the peremptory strike process, and that all parties may be adequately prepared to present any motion they deem appropriate on 5/25/23. The Defense cites one case in support of their request, and the quoted section of that decision reflects that the relief requested by the Defense is not at all a universal practice. The case certainly does not stand for the proposition that the Defense's requested relief is in any way constitutionally required. The Defense provides the Court with no adequate basis to reconsider its Order at 1255 , and the Motion for Reconsideration is denied.. Signed by Judge Robert J. Colville on 5/24/23. Text-only entry; no PDF will issue. This Text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (Doc. No. 1262)

ORDER Amending Decorum Order at 1137 : It is hereby ordered that the Court's Decorum Order at 1137 in this matter is amended such that Footnote 8 is replaced with the following: The Court encourages the media to enter into a press pool or come to their own agreement as to how they wish to rotate which members of the media will be allowed in the courtroom during the trial. If the media does not come to an agreement, or does not wish to come to an agreement, then the Court will set up a schedule to determine which 10 members of the media are allowed in the courtroom during the trial on a rotating basis. The Court encourages any sketch artists to come to an agreement on how they wish to rotate which sketch artists will be allowed in the courtroom during the trial. If the sketch artists do not come to an agreement, or do not wish to come to an agreement, then the Court will set up a schedule to determine which sketch artists are allowed in the courtroom during the trial on a rotating basis. Signed by Judge Robert J. Colville on 5/25/23. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (tk) Modified text on 5/25/2023. (bsl) (Entered: 05/25/2023) (Doc. No. 1267)