Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings U.S. v. Bock Feeding Our Future Order - Us V Bock Feeding Our Future

Court filing

Order - Us V Bock Feeding Our Future

Summary

A Second Amended Arraignment Notice & Case Management Order in United States v. Aimee Marie Bock et al., No. 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, signed by Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung and filed September 12, 2023 as Doc. 170. The order grants Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah's unopposed motion to continue, ECF No. 169, citing voluminous discovery, and extends the motions-filing deadline from September 15, 2023 to December 15, 2023. It sets responses and notices of intent to call witnesses for January 26, 2024, and an arraignment and motions hearing for February 15, 2024. It confirms the government's Brady disclosure obligations, leaves the trial date to District Judge Nancy E. Brasel, and excludes the time through December 15, 2023 under the Speedy Trial Act.

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

No. 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS · Doc. 170 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

      CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS          Doc. 170     Filed 09/12/23   Page 1 of 6




                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                               DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA


 United States of America,                           Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL)

               Plaintiff,
                                                      SECOND AMENDED
 v.                                                ARRAIGNMENT NOTICE &
                                                  CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
 Aimee Marie Bock et al.,

               Defendants.


       Counsel for all parties are instructed to review this Order carefully and in its

entirety as it represents a significant deviation from the schedules that ordinarily

govern criminal cases in the District of Minnesota.

                                           ***

       This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah’s Motion

to Continue Motions Filing Deadline and Motion Hearing, ECF No. 169. This matter was

previously designated complex under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii). See generally ECF

No. 95.

       Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah requests that the September 15, 2023 motions-

filing deadline be extended to December 15, 2023, and the motions hearing and other

related deadlines be adjusted accordingly, as additional time is needed to review discovery

and determine whether certain motions should be filed. Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah’s

request is “[b]ased on the unusually high volume of discovery the [Government] has

disclosed in this matter, unforeseen delays in providing the defense with useable copies of


                                            1
      CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS          Doc. 170     Filed 09/12/23   Page 2 of 6




media and electronic data, and technical difficulties experienced in making use of the

[G]overnment’s disclosures . . . .” ECF No. 169 at 2; see also ECF No. 169 at 2 (“review

of voluminous surveillance video, email, and cell phone data is necessary”).

       In the Court’s First Amended Arraignment Notice & Case Management Order, the

Court stated that “any response to . . . a request [to modify the schedule] shall be filed

within three days.” ECF No. 157 at 6. Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah states that the

Government takes no position on the requested continuance “as long as such an extension

would not conflict with any trial date set by the District Court.” ECF No. 169 at 1.

Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah additionally states that counsel for each of the other

Defendants “ha[s] indicated that they join in this request.” ECF No. 169 at 1. No further

submissions have been received. Accordingly, Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah’s motion

is unopposed.

       Bearing in mind the complexity of this case, the voluminous discovery, and the

absence of any objection to the requested continuance, the Court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h) that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial and such continuance is

necessary to provide Defendants and their counsel reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation and to make efficient use of the parties’ resources.

       Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

       1.       Defendant Abdulkadir Nur Salah’s Motion to Continue Motions Filing

Deadline and Motion Hearing, ECF No. 169, is GRANTED.



                                             2
      CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS          Doc. 170     Filed 09/12/23    Page 3 of 6




       2.     As to Defendants Salim Ahmed Said, Ahmed Sharif Omar-Hashim,

Abdihakim Ali Ahmed, Abdikadir Ainanshe Mohamud, Asad Mohamed Abshir, Hamdi

Hussein Omar, Ahmed Abdullahi Ghedi, and Abdirahman Mohamud Ahmed, an

arraignment hearing will be held before the undersigned on February 15, 2024, at 10:00

a.m., in Courtroom 9W, Diana E. Murphy United States Courthouse, 300 South Fourth

Street, MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota.

       3.     To the extent it has not done so already, the Government shall immediately

begin to make all disclosures required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(a) to be

completed no later than January 13, 2023. See D. Minn. LR 12.1(a)(1). In order to avoid

the need for a recess of the motions hearing, the Government is requested to make, by

January 13, 2023, all disclosures which will be required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 26.2 and 12(h).

       4.     Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act, the Court confirms the

Government’s obligation to disclose to a defendant all exculpatory evidence—that is,

evidence that favors a defendant or casts doubt on the Government’s case—as required by

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny, and orders the Government to do

so. Failure to do so in a timely manner may result in consequences, including, but not

limited to, exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges, contempt

proceedings, disciplinary action, or sanctions by the Court.

       5.     Defendants must make all disclosures required by Federal Rule of Criminal

Procedure 16(b) as soon as practicable, to be completed no later than February 10, 2023.

See D. Minn. LR 12.1(a)(2).



                                             3
        CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS                   Doc. 170        Filed 09/12/23         Page 4 of 6




        6.       This Court previously issued an Order on Pretrial Disclosure & Preservation,

ECF No. 111, which “proactively addresse[d] certain non-dispositive motions that are

commonly filed in the District of Minnesota, which seek discovery, notice of intent to

introduce certain types of evidence, preservation of rough notes, and disclosure of evidence

favorable to a defendant under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and related

authorities.” ECF No. 111 at 3. “These motions often seek relief that is already required

by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, and federal law.”

ECF No. 111 at 3. “To promote the efficient management of these related cases, the Court

issue[d the Order on Pretrial Disclosure & Preservation] to preemptively address such

matters without the need for each defendant to file multiple motions on these subjects.”

ECF No. 111 at 3. Before filing any pretrial motions, a party shall consult the prior

Order on Pretrial Disclosure & Preservation.

        7.       All motions in the above-entitled case must be filed and served consistent

with Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12(b) and 47 on or before December 15, 2023. 1

See D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(1). Two courtesy copies of all motions and responses must be

delivered directly to the chambers of Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung. 2

        8.       Counsel must electronically file a letter on or before December 15, 2023,

if no motions will be filed and there is no need for hearing.




1
        “Before filing a motion under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b), the moving party must confer with the responding
party. The parties must attempt in good faith to clarify and narrow the issues in dispute.” D. Minn. LR 12.1(b).
2
        U.S. Mail or hand-deliver to 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 9W, Minneapolis, MN 55415.


                                                         4
      CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS         Doc. 170    Filed 09/12/23    Page 5 of 6




      9.     All responses to motions must be filed by January 26, 2024. See D. Minn.

LR 12.1(c)(2).

      10.    Any Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses must be filed by January 26, 2024.

See D. Minn. LR. 12.1(c)(3)(A).

      11.    Any Responsive Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses must be filed by

February 2, 2024. See D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(3)(B).

      12.    A motions hearing will be held pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure 12(c) where:

             a.     The Government makes timely disclosures and a defendant identifies
                    in the motions particularized matters for which an evidentiary hearing
                    is necessary; or

             b.     Oral argument is requested by either party in its motion, objection or
                    response pleadings.

      13.    If required, the motions hearing must be heard before Magistrate Judge Tony

N. Leung on February 15, 2024, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 9W, Diana E. Murphy

United States Courthouse, 300 South Fourth Street, MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota. See D.

Minn. LR 12.1(d). The parties shall be prepared to continue the hearing into February

16, 2024, if necessary.

      14.    TRIAL: The trial date, and other related dates, including but not limited

to motions for counsel to participate in voir dire, will be set by District Judge Nancy

E. Brasel. Counsel must contact the Courtroom Deputy for Judge Brasel to confirm

the trial date following the ruling on any pretrial motions.




                                           5
          CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS        Doc. 170     Filed 09/12/23     Page 6 of 6




          15.   The period of time from the date of this Order through December 15,

2023, shall be excluded from Speedy Trial Act computations in this case. See United States

v. Mallett, 751 F.3d 907, 911 (8th Cir. 2014) (“Exclusions of time attributable to one

defendant apply to all codefendants.” (quotation omitted)); United States v. Arrellano-

Garcia, 471 F.3d 897, 900 (8th Cir. 2006) (same).

          16.   Should a party request modification of this schedule, any response to

such a request shall be filed within three days.

          17.   All prior consistent orders relating to the Indictment remain in full force and

effect.

          18.   Failure to comply with any provision of this Order or any other prior

consistent Order shall subject the non-complying party, non-complying counsel and/or the

party such counsel represents to any and all appropriate remedies, sanctions and the like.



Date: September        12     , 2023                      s/ Tony N. Leung
                                                   Tony N. Leung
                                                   United States Magistrate Judge
                                                   District of Minnesota

                                                   United States v. Bock et al.
                                                   Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL)




                                               6


File and source

File
CASE_MND_0-22-cr-00223_US-v-Bock-FeedingOurFuture_doc170_CASE-MGMT-ORDER_2023-09-12.pdf
Size
256,219 bytes
SHA-256
873d767cbd37969d1f07c9d6d1e0eb738ceead7efb0ef31e606e4529467dd849
Our copy
CASE_MND_0-22-cr-00223_US-v-Bock-FeedingOurFuture_doc170_CASE-MGMT-ORDER_2023-09-12.pdf
Original
www.govinfo.gov
Back to top