Order Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure — United States v. Jim Kelly Michel (Dkt. 32)
Summary
An Order Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Document 32, filed February 25, 2026 and dated February 24, 2026 in United States of America v. Jim Kelly Michel, No. 1:26-cr-10030-RGS-3, in the United States District Court, District of Massachusetts. Citing the Due Process Protections Act and Rule 5(f), the order reminds the United States of its obligation to disclose in a timely manner all evidence that is favorable to the defendant or tends to cast doubt on the United States' case, as required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). It states that failure to comply may result in the reversal of any conviction, the exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions and dismissal of charges, among other consequences. It is signed / s / Jennifer C. Boal.
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 Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure — United States v. Jim Kelly Michel (Dkt. 32).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-mad-295477-32-0-931d8b2765/
, SHA-256 a0ccd32c159f18d59bb823bed28c308fd46d9d94f71503fc427dd161ccd8701f.Full text
Case 1:26-cr-10030-RGS Document 32 Filed 02/25/26 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
No. 1:26-cr-10030-RGS-3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
Jim Kelly Michel
ORDER PURSUANT TO
RULE 5 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
February 24, 2026
Boal, U.S.M.J.
Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act, Pub. L. No. 116-182, 134 Stat. 894 (Oct. 21,
2020) and Rule 5(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the United States is reminded of
its obligation to disclose in a timely manner all exculpatory evidence to the defendant, that is, all
evidence that is favorable to the defendant or tends to cast doubt on the United States’ case, as
required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny. Failure to comply with this
order may result in consequences, including, but not limited to, the reversal of any conviction,
the exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges, contempt proceedings,
disciplinary action, and/or sanctions by the Court.
/ s / Jennifer C. Boal
JENNIFER C. BOAL
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 1 of 1
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.mad.295477.32.0.pdf
- Size
- 120,434 bytes
- SHA-256
- a0ccd32c159f18d59bb823bed28c308fd46d9d94f71503fc427dd161ccd8701f
- Our copy
- gov.uscourts.mad.295477.32.0.pdf
- Original
- No public link identified.