BRADY ORDER as to GREGORY J. BLOTNICK — USA v. BLOTNICK (Dkt. 9, No. 2:21-cr-00796-BRM, filed 2021-05-18)

Summary

An order filed May 18, 2021 as Document 9 in United States of America v. Gregory J. Blotnick, Case 2:21-cr-00796-BRM, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, entered at the defendant's initial appearance under Rule 5(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. With the prosecutor and defense counsel present, the Court confirms the government's continuing duty, under Brady v. Maryland, Giglio v. United States and later cases, to disclose information favorable to the defense on criminal liability or mitigation of punishment. Possible consequences for violating the order include exclusion of evidence, dismissal of charges, contempt proceedings and disciplinary referral. The order bears the signature of Hon. Michael A. Hammer, United States Magistrate Judge.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case 2:21-cr-00796-BRM Document9 _ Filed 05/18/21 Page 1of1PagelD: 24

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

21-15165
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No.

v. ORDER

GREGORY J. BLOTNICK

Defendant.

Pursuant to Rule 5(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and as set forth on
the record during the initial appearance of the defendant on this 18th day of May ,
2021, in the presence of both the prosecutor and defense counsel in this matter, the Court
confirms the United States’ continuing obligation, pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83
(1963), Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and subsequent cases, to timely disclose
information favorable to the defense as to criminal liability on the charged offense(s) or
mitigation of any punishment that may be imposed. Such favorable information includes
information that may cast doubt on the credibility of government witnesses. Possible
consequences for violating this order include exclusion of evidence, dismissal of charges,

contempt proceedings, disciplinary referral, and any other relief authorized by law.

s/Michael A. Hammer

Hon. Michael A. Hammer
United States Magistrate Judge


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.njd.484966.9.0.pdf

Size

158,045 bytes

SHA-256

f4b50b05a3f87014c7e6702d33164ccb29642a4e5defb58cb157b7e38451d015

Our copy

gov.uscourts.njd.484966.9.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)