District of Nevada rules against 924(c)’s Residual Clause…
Chief Judge Gloria Navarro dismissed Count Three of the Superseding Indictment. Her decision overruled Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen’s recommendation that the charge stay on the indictment. Count Three, known as a 924(c) “enhancement”, provides additional stiff penalties for defendants who use or carry a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence. The underlying charge, Count Two, (Conspiracy to Impede or Injure a Federal Officer 18 USC § 372), falls into an evolving legal standard regarding “crimes of violence”. The portion of § 924(c) that applies to § 372 is void for vagueness due to recent Supreme Court and Circuit Court rulings. Continue reading “Count Three Dismissed”
Chief Judge Gloria Navarro issued a ruling today effectively putting the jury in the upcoming Tier 3 trial under the same protective order as all of the discovery evidence. The order comes as no surprise since the case historically garners much media attention. However, it wasn’t the act of putting juror identities under protective order that gave rise to notice; it was the reason for the order that stands out as peculiar. Continue reading “Court Protects Jurors Identities Because of Defendant’s Supporters”
The Government filed a motion (ECF No. 1440) on January 27th, 2017 requesting a protective order on the identity of an undercover employee (UCE). The Government wishes to call the witness to testify, but expresses concern that revealing the identity of the UCE could jeopardize other ongoing investigations. The UCE’s investigation apparently led to the arrest of the defendants in Tier 3. Further, the Government asked the court to preclude any cross-examination that might shed light on the UCE’s identity. The defendants seek undercover agent’s identity in order to investigate the UCE’s history and strength of character for cross-examination. According to the Government, the UCE could play conversations they recorded with the defendants. Continue reading “Defendants Seek Undercover Agent’s Identity”
Stewart, Drexler, and Parker challenge Government’s last minute submission.
On January 25th, 2017, less than two weeks before trial, the Government submitted an extra 5+ gigabytes of discovery evidence. Appropriately, Stewart, Parker, and Drexler motioned to preclude this evidence for trial for several reasons. First, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCP) mandate timely dissemination of discovery evidence. Second, the Government routinely vocalizes opposition to any motion made by defendants if it does not follow strict rules of timeliness. It follows that untimely discovery evidence draws defendants objections. Continue reading “Untimely Discovery Evidence Draws Defendants Objections”
The US Attorney’s filed the Government’s Exhibit List (ECF No. 1423). While it comes as no surprise that Social Media is present in the list, the volume of evidence that is from social media platforms is staggering. Specifically, well over one third of the evidence in trial will come from Facebook and YouTube.
In addition to Facebook posts and chats, as well as YouTube videos, the Government intends to submit email conversations as well as material obtained from or related to relatives of co-defendants. Most notably, the jury will see as evidence statements made by Carol Bundy, wife of Rancher Cliven Bundy. It is evident that the internet is a medium easily accessible to the Government for use in furtherance of their overbearing prosecution of individuals whose only “crime” is resistance to lawless bureaucracies that exist to subjugate liberty-minded citizens to tyrannical land management policies that exist to further the agendas of special interests in Washington D.C. Continue reading “Government’s Exhibit List”
Motions to shield relevant evidence of Government culpability from jury…
The US Attorneys motion the Court to preclude key evidence in the first Bundy Ranch trial. The sixteen (16) page filing seeks to block the introduction of certain evidence because it would act in favor of defendants. Subsequently, three full pages delineate a convoluted argument against any evidence that could introduce the possibility of jury nullification, referring to it as “a violation of a juror’s oath to apply the law as instructed by the court.” (Citing Merced v. McGrath, 2004). In short, the Government fears jury nullification and subsequently wishes the jury to be ignorant of any collateral evidence that might persuade them to acquit. Continue reading “Government Fears Jury Nullification in Bundy Ranch Trial”
Motions to dismiss from Santilli and Payne officially denied…
Gloria Navarro Adopts Two Leen Denial Recommendations. Defendant Ryan Payne sought dismissal of four 924(c) charges that, as a result, would lessen maximum potential prison sentences. Santilli sought dismissal of the charges against himself on the grounds that his actions in Bunkerville were within the scope of rights under the First Amendment. Navarro adopted both of Leen’s recommendations therefore formally denying both. Continue reading “Navarro Adopts Two Leen Denial Recommendations”
The Las Vegas Review Journal, Battle Born Media, and the Associated Press will petition the 9th Circuit of Appeals for a Writ of Mandamus. The writ would overturn the District of Nevada’s persistent denial of motions to unseal evidence in the Bundy Ranch trials. All three media outlets contend that key elements of the case lie in the realm of Constitutionally protected rights. As a result, the Court’s protective order effectively vaporizes judicial transparency because conduct of citizens exercising rights to be critical of the Government are subject to the Government’s one-sided narrative of the progression of events at Bundy Ranch. It is telling that mainstream media challenges protective order of the District Court. Continue reading “Media Challenges Protective Order”