Case 1:22-cr-00522-GHW Document 60 Filed 01/25/23 Page 1 of 3
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
`
`“y-
`
`ALEXANDER FRANCISCOetal.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`22cr522 (GHW)
`
`ORDER
`
`Sarah L. Cave, 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 ofviolating 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.
`
`/d. at 87. This
`
`obligation applies regardless of whether the defendant requests this information or whether the
`
`information would itself constitute admissible evidence. The Government shall disclose such
`
`information to the defense promptly afterits 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 mustdisclose 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 sufficiently in
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cr-00522-GHW Document 60 Filed 01/25/23 Page 2 of 3
`
`advance oftrial in order for the defendant to makeeffective use of it at trial or at such other time
`
`as the Court may order.?
`
`The foregoing obligations are continuing ones and apply to materials that become knownto
`
`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 for a 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 purposes of this Order, the Government has an affirmative obligation to seek all
`
`information subject to disclosure under this Order from all current or former federal, state, and local
`
`prosecutors, law enforcement officers, 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 Government fails 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 for violations of the
`
`1 This Order does not purport to set forth an exhaustive list of the Government's disclosure obligations.
`2 The Classified Infermation Procedures Act sets forth separate procedures to be followed in the event that the
`Government believes matters relating to classified information may arise in connection with the prosecution. See 18
`U.S.C. app, 3 §§ 1 et seq.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cr-00522-GHW Document 60 Filed 01/25/23 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`Government’s disclosure obligations, or refer the matter to disciplinary authorities;
`
`(5) dismiss charges before trial or vacate a conviction after trial or a guilty plea; or
`
`(6) enter any other order thatis just under the circumstances.
`
`Dated: January 25, 2023
`New York, New York
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
` RAH L. CAVE/
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`
