The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Leon Holmes United States District Judge
Several motions are pending in this case, and the Court hereby rules on them as follows: Osborn's motion to suppress videotape recording is DENIED. Document #503. Osborn's former lawyer, Sara F. Merritt, stated on the record at the most recent hearing that she filed the motion to suppress videotape recording in error because Osborn wishes that the videotape be introduced but objects to an audiotape.
The government has filed a motion in limine regarding punishment. Document #509. That motion is GRANTED. No argument or reference to punishment for the offenses charged will be made in the presence of the jury.
The government's motion in limine regarding plea negotiations is GRANTED. Document #510. No mention of plea negotiations may be made in front of the jury.
Osborn's motion to suppress audiotape recordings and transcripts is DENIED because the motion fails to allege facts that, if proven, would result in suppression of the audiotape recordings and transcripts. Document #514. Osborn asserts that much of the tape is inaudible. If true, that would go to the weight that the jury should give to the audiotape, not to its admissibility.
Osborn has filed six motions that are encompassed by the Court's pretrial discovery order, which was entered in this case as Document #149. The pretrial discovery order provides, in part:
If a party has not complied with a discovery request, the party seeking discovery may move the Court to order compliance. Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d)(2). Until a party has unsuccessfully requested discovery, no motion is needed. 2 C. Wright, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: CRIMINAL 2d § 257. Counsel must comply with Local Rule 7.2(g) in connection with any motions to compel discovery.
Local Rule 7.2(g) provides:
All motions to compel discovery and all other discovery-enforcement motions and all motions for protective orders shall contain a statement by the moving party that the parties have conferred in good faith on the specific issue or issues in dispute and that they are not able to resolve their disagreements without the intervention of the Court. If any such motion lacks such a statement, that motion may be dismissed summarily for failure to comply with this rule. Repeated failures to comply will be considered an adequate basis for the imposition of sanctions.
Pursuant to this Court's pretrial discovery order and Local Rule 7.2(g), the following motions are DENIED: Documents #526, #527, #528, #531, #534, and #535.
Osborn has also filed a motion to exclude evidence that the government intends to rely upon at trial pursuant to Rule 404(b). That motion does not specify the evidence that Osborn wishes to have excluded. That motion is therefore DENIED. Document #530. If Osborn objects to any evidence offered pursuant to Rule 404(b), he must do so with specificity before or during trial.
Osborn has filed a motion for immunity for defendant's witnesses. Document #532. He does not identify any specific witnesses for whom immunity is sought, nor does he state a factual or legal basis for granting immunity in any particular situation, so his motion is DENIED.
Osborn has filed a motion for a forensic expert at the government's expense. Document #533. He asks that the Court order the government to provide a forensic expert's inspection and opinion as to the reliability of the tape and equipment used in the copying and recording of all tapes intended to be introduced into evidence in this case. That motion is DENIED.
Osborn has filed a motion to preclude the government's introduction of prior convictions under Rule 609 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Document #529. The Court orders that the government notify Osborn's counsel and approach the bench before mentioning in front of the jury of any of Osborn's prior convictions. The Court will hear argument and rule with ...