Nonetheless, in its discretion, the Court declines to apply Apprendi retroactively to Richardson for the same reasons it declines to apply it retroactively for Tate.

See, e.g., United States v. Coleman, 830 F. App’x 769, 770 (7th Cir. 2020) (holding that the § 401 First Step Act modification postdates the Fair Sentencing Act and “is not retroactive.”) Nonetheless, as it relates to a motion for a reduced ...

Nonetheless, the Court declines to apply Apprendi and Alleyne retroactively to Tate.

Counsel for the intervenor will be provided with a single copy of protected material, except as otherwise agreed to by the United States Attorney.

Disclosure of the material or information contained therein is to be limited to: (1) the court; (2) counsel for intervenor and any professional, paralegal and clerical personnel who are engaged in assisting counsel in the case identified in the prior paragraph; (3) any person not employed by, or under contract with the intervenor who is retained by the attorneys for the intervenor as a consultant or expert witness to assist in the cases identified in the prior paragraph; and (4) any other person whom the court has deemed to be entitled to view the protected material.

Protected material received by counsel for the intervenor, or the information contained therein, is to be used only for the subject matter of People v. Reynolds, Case No. 96 CR 1959903.

In the absence of such agreement and for good cause shown, the brief period for retention of this material may be extended by order of the court.

This order does not prevent the United States Attorney from asserting any other legally cognizable privilege to withhold any document or information.