Order Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure — United States v. Sniders Jean-Jacques et al. (Dkt. 35)
Summary
Document 35 is an Order Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, dated February 26, 2026, in United States v. Sniders Jean-Jacques, No. 1:26-cr-10031-RGS-1, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. United States Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal relies on the Due Process Protections Act, Pub. L. No. 116-182, and Rule 5(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The order reminds the United States of its obligation to disclose in a timely manner all exculpatory evidence, meaning evidence favorable to the defendant or tending to cast doubt on the United States' case. It states that failure to comply may result in consequences, including reversal of any conviction, exclusion of evidence and adverse jury instructions.
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. Sniders Jean-Jacques et al. (Dkt. 35).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-mad-295484-35-0-9f8c6636ca/
, SHA-256 f11a896144e889f40f834626540ff0bafae52e4f17d82d1579bf8ae403f160de.Full text
Case 1:26-cr-10031-RGS Document 35 Filed 02/26/26 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
No. 1:26-cr-10031-RGS-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
Sniders Jean-Jacques
ORDER PURSUANT TO
RULE 5 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
February 26, 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.295484.35.0.pdf
- Size
- 121,319 bytes
- SHA-256
- f11a896144e889f40f834626540ff0bafae52e4f17d82d1579bf8ae403f160de
- Our copy
- gov.uscourts.mad.295484.35.0.pdf
- Original
- No public link identified.