Case 2:18-cr-00422-SMB Document 1211 Filed 08/09/21 Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`DISTRICT JUDGE'S MINUTES
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF ARIZONA – PHOENIX
`
`U.S. District Judge: Susan M. Brnovich
`
`Date: August 9, 2021
`
`USA v. Lacey et al
`
`
`
`
`
`Case Number: CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB
`
`
`
`Assistant U.S. Attorneys: Andrew Stone, Peter Kozinets, Margaret Perlmeter, Kevin Rapp and
`Daniel Boyle
` Defendant-1: Michael Lacey, Released – Present
` Attorney for Defendant (1): Paul Cambria, Jr. and Erin McCampbell Paris, Retained
` Defendant-2: James Larkin, Released – Present
` Attorney for Defendant (2): Thomas Bienert, Jr. and Whitney Bernstein, Retained
` Defendant-3: Scott Spear, Released-Present
`
` Attorney for Defendant (3): Bruce Feder, Retained
` Defendant-4: John Brunst, Released-Present
` Attorney for Defendant (4): Gopi Panchapakesan, Retained
` Defendant-6: Andrew Padilla, Released- Not Present (Presence waived)
` Attorney for Defendant (6): David Eisenberg, CJA Appointment
` Defendant-7: Joye Vaught, Released – Not Present (Presence waived)
` Attorney for Defendant (7): Joy Bertrand, CJA Appointment
`
`CONTINUATION OF FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE:
`
`
`All parties appearing by video. The proposed strikes for cause with objections provided by the parties
`are reviewed with counsel and an additional 26 jurors are stricken. At the request of the Defendants,
`the emails from counsel with the proposed strikes and objections shall be filed and made part of the
`record.
`
`Defendants’ Joint Motion for Additional Peremptory Challenges (Doc. 1191) is granted in part to allow
`Defendants an additional three strikes and the Government one additional strike. In total, the defense
`will have 15 strikes and the Government will have nine strikes. The Court will seat 16 jurors.
`
`Discussion held regarding Defendants’ Supplement (Doc. 1181), which the Court construes as a
`Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s denial of Defendants’ Motion to Disclose Grand Jury
`Instructions on Prostitution (Doc.1171). For reasons set forth on the record, the motion is denied.
`
`Trial procedures are discussed. Over objection by the Government, IT IS ORDERED that any party
`intending to use a power point or exhibits for opening statements will need to provide a copy of the
`power point and exhibits to all counsel 24 hours in advance. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 48
`hours in advance of any day of trial, the parties are directed to provide the Court and all counsel a list
`of anticipated witnesses and exhibits they intend to use that day. Additionally, each day, the parties
`shall give the Court the list of witnesses along with who will be conducting direct examination and who
`will be leading the cross-examination.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:18-cr-00422-SMB Document 1211 Filed 08/09/21 Page 2 of 2
`
`USA v. Lacey et al
`
`Case Number: CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: August 9, 2021
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`IT IS ORDERED resetting the Status Conference presently set for August 13, 2021 to August 20,
`2021 at 9:30 a.m. in the Special Proceedings Courtroom.
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Jury Trial presently set for August 23, 2021 is continued until
`September 7, 2021.
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that portions of the transcript shall be sealed between 9:49 a.m. and
`10:01 a.m.
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that excludable delay under Title 18 U.S.C. '3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)
`will commence from August 23, 2021 to September 7, 2021.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Court Reporter Christine Coaly
`Deputy Clerk Elaine Garcia
`
`
`
`FPTC: 59 mins
`
`Start: 9:02 AM
`Stop: 10:01 AM
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

PTO Denying Access

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket