Epstein Secrets

y evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous only after the development of a full factual record at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 808 (2d Cir. 1992). The evidence at trial may shed further light on whether the questions posed were objectively ambiguous in contex

list As a general matter, "district courts have authority to compel pretrial disclosure of the identity of government witnesses." United States v. Cannon, 528 F.2d 296, 300 (2d Cir. 1975). In deciding whether to order accelerated disclosure of a witness list, courts consider whether a defendant has m

y evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous only after the development of a full factual record at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 808 (2d Cir. 1992). The evidence at trial may shed further light on whether the questions posed were objectively ambiguous in contex

list As a general matter, "district courts have authority to compel pretrial disclosure of the identity of government witnesses." United States v. Cannon, 528 F.2d 296, 300 (2d Cir. 1975). In deciding whether to order accelerated disclosure of a witness list, courts consider whether a defendant has m

y evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous only after the development of a full factual record at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 808 (2d Cir. 1992). The evidence at trial may shed further light on whether the questions posed were objectively ambiguous in contex

list As a general matter, "district courts have authority to compel pretrial disclosure of the identity of government witnesses." United States v. Cannon, 528 F.2d 296, 300 (2d Cir. 1975). In deciding whether to order accelerated disclosure of a witness list, courts consider whether a defendant has m