Case 1:19-cr-00821-KMW Document 350
`
`Filed 08/21/24
`
`Page1of3
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
`
`
`~y-
`
`
`
`19-CR-821 (KMW)
`
`ORDER
`
`ALEXANDER BAEZ,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`Ona T. Wang, United States Magistrate Judge:
`
`This Order is entered, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(f) and the Due
`
`Process Protections Act, Pub. L. No 116-182, 134 Stat. 894 (Oct. 21, 2020), to confirm the
`
`Government’s disclosure obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny,
`
`and to summarize the possible consequences of violating those obligations.
`
`The Government must disclose to the defense all information “favorable to an accused”
`
`that is “material either to guilt or to punishment” and that is known to the Government. fd. at 87.
`
`This obligation applies regardless of whether the defendant requests this information or whether
`
`the information would itself constitute admissible evidence. The Government shail disclose such
`
`information to the defense promptlyafter its existence becomes known to the Government so
`
`that the defense may make effective use of the information in the preparation ofits case.
`
`As part of these obligations, the Government must disclose any information that can be
`
`used to impeach the trial testimony of a Government witness within the meaning of Giglio v.
`
`United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972}, and its progeny. Such information must be disclosed
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cr-00821-KMW Document 350
`
`Filed 08/21/24
`
`Page 2 of 3
`
`sufficiently in advanceof trial in order for the defendant to makeeffective use ofit at trial or at
`
`such other time as the Court may order.!
`
`The foregoing obligations are continuing ones and apply to materials that become known
`
`to the Governmentin the future. These obligations also apply to information that is otherwise
`
`subject to disclosure regardless of whether the Governmentcreditsit.
`
`In the event the Government believes that a disclosure under this Order would
`
`compromise witness safety, victim rights, national security, a sensitive law-enforcement
`
`technique, or any other substantial governmentinterest, it may apply to the Court fora
`
`modification of its obligations, which may include in camera review or withholding or subjecting to
`
`a protective order all or part of the information otherwise subject to disclosure.
`
`For purposesof this Order, the Government hasan affirmative obligation to seek all
`
`information subject to disclosure under this Order from all current or former federal, state, and
`
`iocal prosecutors, law enforcementofficers, and other officers who have participated in the
`
`prosecution, or investigation that led to the prosecution, of the offense or offenses with which the
`
`defendantis charged.
`
`If the Governmentfails to comply with this Order, the Court, in addition to ordering
`
`production of the information, may:
`
`(1) specify the terms and conditions of such production;
`
`(2} grant a continuance;
`
`(3) impose evidentiary sanctions;
`
`(4) impose contempt or other sanctions on any lawyer responsible forviolations of the
`
`' This Order does not purport to set forth an exhaustive list of the Government’s disclosure obligations.
`? The Classified Information Procedures Act sets forth separate procedures to be followed in the event that the
`Government believes matters relating to classified information mayarise in connection with the prosecution. See 18
`ULS.C, app. 3 §§ 1 ef seq.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:19-cr-00821-KMW Document 350
`
`Filed 08/21/24
`
`Page 3of3
`
`Government's disclosure obligations, or refer the matter to disciplinary authorities;
`
`(5) dismiss charges beforetrial or vacate a conviction after trial or a guilty plea; or
`
`(6) enter any other order thatis just under the circumstances.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: August 21, 2024
`New York, New York
`
`s/ Ona T. Wang
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`2
`
`
`
`
