Court filing
Government's First Response to Standing Discovery Order — U.S. v. Denton, No. 0:21-cr-60171 (S.D. Fla.), Dkt. 26
Summary
The Government's First Response to the Standing Discovery Order, Document 26 entered July 9, 2021, in United States of America v. Cindi Ellis Denton, Case No. 0:21-cr-60171-RS, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Broward Division. The response is numbered to correspond with Local Rule 88.10 and demands reciprocal discovery and notice of alibi defense. It states that on April 12, 2021, the United States produced PDFs to counsel for the Defendant via email, including text messages and emails between the Defendant and co-conspirators, a recorded call of the Defendant, bank records, business documents and PPP application materials. It lists further productions by CD on May 26, 2021 and June 7, 2021. The signature block names Lindsey Lazopoulos Friedman and Philip B. Trout.
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
Cite this document
“Government's First Response to Standing Discovery Order — U.S. v. Denton, No. 0:21-cr-60171 (S.D. Fla.), Dkt. 26.”
Original at ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov, No. 0:21-cr-60171-RS, Doc. 26. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/ppp-attempt-conspiracy-legal-filings/undated-gov-uscourts-flsd-594906-26-0-gov-uscourts-flsd-594906-26-0/
, SHA-256 83caf9f97c86d6eea118bc93a7f00ddd7b1af2994a528354445504a464097207.Full text
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/09/2021 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
BROWARD DIVISION
CASE NO. 21-60171-CR-RJS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
CINDI ELLIS DENTON,
Defendant.
__________________________________/
GOVERNMENT’S FIRST RESPONSE TO
THE STANDING DISCOVERY ORDER
The United States hereby files this response to the Standing Discovery Order. This
response also complies with Local Rule 88.10 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16, and is
numbered to correspond with Local Rule 88.10.
1. The government produced any written or recorded statements made by the
defendant.
2. The government produced the portion of the written record containing the substance
of any oral statement made by the defendant before or after arrest in response to
interrogation by any person then known to the defendant to be a government agent.
3. The defendant did not testify before the Grand Jury.
4. The government produced documents regarding the defendant’s prior criminal
record.
5. For convenience, a substantial portion of the salient documents and records were
provided for review in electronic form. Please be advised, however, that the
attachments did not contain copies of all the books, papers, documents, etc., that
the government may intend to introduce at trial.
Books, papers, documents, data, devices, photographs, tangible objects, buildings
or places which the government intends to use as evidence at trial to prove its case
in chief, or were obtained or belonging to the defendant, will be provided along
with this response to the extent practicable but not filed with the Court. Other items,
including additional items that may become available at a later date, may be
1
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/09/2021 Page 2 of 4
inspected at a mutually convenient time. Please call the undersigned to set up a
date and time that is convenient to both parties.
The attachments produced along with this discovery response are not necessarily
copies of all the books, papers, documents, etc., that the government may intend to
introduce at trial.
6. Law enforcement has conducted forensic evaluations and/or data extractions in
connection with electronic devices seized during this investigation. The
government is otherwise unaware at this time of any physical or mental
examinations or scientific tests or experiments made in connection with this case.
B. DEMAND FOR RECIPROCAL DISCOVERY: The United States requests the
disclosure and production of materials described in Local Rule 88.10(b). This
request is also made pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure.
C. The government will disclose any information or material which may be favorable
on the issues of guilt or punishment within the scope of Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83 (1963), and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976).
D. The government will disclose any payments, promises of immunity, leniency,
preferential treatment, or other inducements made to prospective government
witnesses, within the scope of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), or
Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959).
E. The government will disclose any prior convictions of any alleged co-conspirator,
accomplice or informant who will testify for the government at trial.
F. The defendant was not identified in a lineup, show up, photo array or similar
identification proceedings.
G. The government has advised its agents and officers involved in this case to preserve
all rough notes.
H. The government will timely advise the defendant of its intent, if any, to introduce
during its case in chief proof of evidence pursuant to F.R.E. 404(b). Pursuant to
Local Rule 88.10, the notice will be provided regardless of whether the evidence
may be used in the case-in-chief, for impeachment or possible rebuttal, and will
include the general nature of the evidence. You are hereby on notice that all
evidence made available to you for inspection, as well as all statements disclosed
herein or in any future discovery letter, may be offered in the trial of this cause,
under F.R.E. 404(b) or otherwise (including the inextricably-intertwined doctrine).
I. The defendant is not an aggrieved person, as defined in Title 18, United States
Code, Section 2510(11), of any relevant electronic surveillance that was authorized
2
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/09/2021 Page 3 of 4
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2516 and 18 U.S.C §2518 and that has been unsealed in
accordance with 18 U.S.C §2518.
J. The government will order transcribed the Grand Jury testimony of all witnesses
who will testify for the government at the trial of this case.
K. No narcotics are involved in this indictment.
L. The government is unaware at this time whether any automobile, vessel, or aircraft
allegedly used in the commission of this offense is in the government’s possession.
M. The government is not aware of any latent fingerprints or palm prints which have
been identified by a government expert as those of the defendant.
N. The government will make every possible effort in good faith to stipulate to all facts
or points of law the truth and existence of which is not contested and the early
resolution of which will expedite trial. These stipulations will be discussed at the
discovery conference.
Take note that the government intends to offer banking, corporate and other records
in its case-in-chief pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 902(11), and will provide certifications
for those records consistent with Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)(A)-(C). If counsel challenges
the certifications, please contact the undersigned to discuss the possibility of
resolving the issue without need for court intervention.
O. To date, the government has not received a request for disclosure of the
subject-matter of expert testimony that the government reasonably expects to offer
at trial. Please note, however, that at trial the government may offer testimony
summarizing bank records, tracing funds between accounts and individuals, and
describing the details of certain financial transactions. The government does not
believe this constitutes expert opinion testimony within the meaning of Fed. R.
Evid. 702, 703 or 705. See United States v. Hamacker, 455 F.3d 1316, 1330-32
(11th Cir. 2006) (rejecting defendant’s argument that a testifying financial analyst
was an expert, or that the witness offered expert opinions, when the witness merely
compared and summarized records). If defense counsel disagrees with the
government’s assessment, then counsel should contact the undersigned in an effort
to resolve the issue, if possible, without court intervention.
Having made this disclosure, the government hereby demands a written summary
of expert testimony that the defense reasonably expects to offer at trial pursuant to
Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, describing the witnesses'
opinions, the bases and the reasons for those opinions, and the witnesses'
qualifications.
The government is aware of its continuing duty to disclose such newly discovered
additional information required by the Standing Discovery Order, Federal Rule of Criminal
3
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/09/2021 Page 4 of 4
Procedure 16(c), Brady, Giglio, Napue, and the obligation to assure a fair trial.
In addition to the request made above by the United States pursuant to both Local Rule
88.10(b) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b), in accordance with Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 12.1, the United States hereby demands Notice of Alibi defense; the
approximate dates and places of the offenses are set forth in the indictment.
On April 12, 2021, the United States produced PDFs to counsel for the Defendant via email.
That discovery included text messages and emails between the Defendant and co-conspirators, a
recorded call of the Defendant, bank records, business documents and PPP application materials.
On May 26, 2021, the United States produced via CD additional discovery that included extraction
reports of co-conspirators’ cellular telephones, additional bank records, phone records, email
account records, messages, and other documents. On June 7, 2021, the United States produced via
CD additional discovery that included one additional extraction of a co-conspirator’s cellular
telephone.
This matter involved numerous additional electronic devices that were obtained as part of
this investigation and involved numerous other individuals, many, if not most, of whom had little
relation to the defendants, and because the documents related to such individuals are voluminous,
the government will make available such records upon request. All discovery is being produced
subject to this Court’s anticipated Protective Order Regulating Disclosure. Please contact the
undersigned Assistant United States Attorney if any portions are missing or if there are any issues
accessing the discovery.
Respectfully Submitted,
JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ JOSEPH S. BEEMSTERBOER
ACTING UNITED STATES ACTING CHIEF, FRAUD SECTION
ATTORNEY
By: /s/ Lindsey Lazopoulos Friedman By: /s/ Philip B. Trout
Lindsey Lazopoulos Friedman PHILIP B. TROUT
Assistant United States Attorney Trial Attorney, Fraud Section
Florida Bar No. 091792 U.S. Department of Justice
99 N.E. 4th Street 1400 New York Ave NW
Miami, FL 333132 Washington, DC 20530
Tel: (305) 961-9168 Tel: (202) 616-6989
Fax: (305) 536-7214 Fax: (202) 514-3708
Email: lindsey.friedman@usdoj.gov Email: philip.trout@usdoj.gov
4
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flsd.594906.26.0.pdf
- Size
- 168,780 bytes
- SHA-256
- 83caf9f97c86d6eea118bc93a7f00ddd7b1af2994a528354445504a464097207
- Original
- PACER (login required)