Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Order — United States v. John Lee Bass, Jr. (Eastern District of North Carolina, Document 79)

Order — United States v. John Lee Bass, Jr. (Eastern District of North Carolina, Document 79)

Summary

Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Swank's order of November 7, 2023 in United States of America v. John Lee Bass, Jr., No. 5:23-CR-293-4D, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Western Division, entered as Document 79 in Case 5:23-cr-00293-D-BM. Citing Rule 5(f)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Due Process Protections Act, the court confirms the government's duty to disclose evidence under Brady v. Maryland. The order quotes Brady that suppression of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material to guilt or punishment. Possible consequences of noncompliance listed include exclusion of evidence, dismissal or reversal of charges and imposition of sanctions.

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

“Order — United States v. John Lee Bass, Jr. (Eastern District of North Carolina, Document 79).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-no-5-23-cr-00293-dkt-79-e-d-n-c-9000461318/, SHA-256 8fc7edc536800cafacd48fff1345b3bccd10a2e85b0bf975f76503fa37270e16.

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:23-CR-293-4D

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Vv. ORDER

JOHN LEE BASS, JR.,

Defendant.

Pursuant to Rule 5(f)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended by the
Due Process Protections Act, Pub. L. No. 116-182, 134 Stat. 894 (Oct. 21, 2020), the court hereby
confirms the government’s disclosure obligation under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963),
and its progeny. See Brady, 373 U.S. at 87 (“[T]he suppression by the prosecution of evidence
favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to
guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.”). Failure by
the government to comply with its disclosure obligation could result in such consequences as
exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal or reversal of charges, contempt
proceedings, or imposition of sanctions.

SO ORDERED, this 7th day of November, 2023.

KIMBERLY A. SWANK
United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:23-cr-00293-D-BM Document 79 Filed 11/07/23 Page1of1

File and source

File
79.pdf
Size
178,539 bytes
SHA-256
8fc7edc536800cafacd48fff1345b3bccd10a2e85b0bf975f76503fa37270e16
Our copy
79.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top