`
`
`
`
`DISTRICT JUDGE'S MINUTES
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF ARIZONA – PHOENIX
`
`U.S. District Judge: Diane J. Humetewa
`
`Date: July 27, 2023
`
`
`
`USA v. Michael Lacey et al
`
`
`
`
`
`Case Number: CR-18-00422-001-PHX-DJH
`
`
`Assistant U.S. Attorneys: Andrew C. Stone, Austin Berry, Kevin M. Rapp, Margaret Perlmeter,
`Peter Kozinets
`
`Attorney for Defendants: Paul J. Cambria Jr., Retained for Defendant Lacey, present; Joseph N. Roth,
`Sarah P. Lawson, Timothy J. Eckstein, Retained for Defendant Larkin, present; Bruce S. Feder,
`Retained and Eric W. Kessler, CJA for Defendant Spear, present; Gary S. Lincenberg, Gopi K.
`Panchapakesan, Retained for Defendant Brunst, present; David S. Eisenberg, CJA for Defendant
`Padilla, present telephonically; Joy M. Bertrand, CJA for Defendant Vaught, present telephonically.
`
`Defendants: ☒ Present ☐ Not Present ☐ Released ☐ Custody ☐ Summons ☐ Writ
`
`FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE:
`
`1:04 p.m. Final Pretrial Conference held. Counsel and Defendants present. Trial logistics and schedule
`discussed. Trial will be in recess on Friday, September 29, 2023. Mr. Lincenberg’s objections to the
`trial schedule are overruled. Mr. Eckstein’s renewed oral Motion to Continue Trial is denied. The Court
`will sit 16 jurors. Defendants will have 15 strikes total and the Government will have 9 strikes. Strikes
`will be simultaneous. Motions in Limine discussed.
`
`As set forth on the record, IT IS ORDERED that the Government’s Motion in Limine to Preclude
`Defense from Arguing Legality of Ads (Doc. 1592) is DENIED without prejudice, subject to further
`objection at trial. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Government’s Motion in Limine to Preclude
`Defense from Commenting on Legitimacy of Prosecution (Doc. 1598) is GRANTED to the extent it
`relates to the following statement at issue in the Motion: “When you have the law and the facts on your
`side, you go to civil court, when you don’t, you take people’s money so that they can’t defend
`themselves and you bring a criminal charge.” IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Government’s
`Motion in Limine to Preclude Defense from Referencing Craigslist Meetings with Attorneys General
`(Doc. 1600) is DENIED without prejudice, subject to further objection at trial. 2:07 p.m. Recess.
`
`2:26 p.m. Court reconvenes. Counsel and Defendants present. Discussion held re: Jury Instructions.
`IT IS ORDERED that by July 31, 2023, Defendants may file a supplemental motion no longer than
`seven (7) pages regarding the draft Travel Act jury instructions and specific references to state law. The
`Government shall respond by August 2, 2023. No reply is permitted.
`
`Juror Questionnaires discussed. Upon review of the parties’ stipulated strikes, IT IS ORDERED
`striking said stipulated jurors. Disputed strikes discussed. 4:06 p.m. Recess.
`
`
`
`Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1650 Filed 07/27/23 Page 2 of 2
`
`USA v. Michael Lacey
`
`Case Number: CR-18-00422-001-PHX-DJH
`
`Date: July 27, 2023
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`4:24 p.m. Court reconvenes. Counsel and Defendants present. Disputed strikes discussed. The Court’s
`ruling as to the disputed strikes for hardship and cause are set forth on the record. The remaining jurors
`will be scheduled to report for jury selection. Additional trial logistics discussed.
`
`IT IS ORDERED setting a Hearing for August 4, 2023, at 1:00 PM in the Special Proceedings
`Courtroom, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003. The Court will take up the statement of
`the case, permit the parties to make a record on the finalized jury instructions, and address miscellaneous
`issues related to the trial. 6:58 p.m. Recess.
`
`Court Reporter Hilda Lopez
`Deputy Clerk Liliana Figueroa
`
`
`Start: 1:04 PM
`Stop: 6:58 PM
`Total: 5hrs 17min
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

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.

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