Epstein Secrets

be produced "in sufficient time that the defendant will have a reasonable opportunity to act upon the information efficaciously." United States v. Rodriguez, 496 F.3d 221, 226 (2d Cir. 2007). Immediate disclosure of such material is not warranted simply because the defendant prefers it. See, e.g., United

(S.D.N.Y. Jan. 6, 2010) (declining to order immediate disclosure of Giglio material, because the Government stated it would provide both Giglio and Jencks Act material "shortly before trial"); United States v. Davis, No. 06 Cr. 911 (LBS), 2009 WL 637164, at *14 (S.D.N.Y. March 11, 2009) ("The Second C

L 1494027, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2019) (citing Rodriguez v. Vill. Green Realty, Inc., 788 F.3d 31, 47 (2d

that "the defense will receive notice of any co-conspirator statements that the Government may seek to introduce through witness statements" in its Jencks Act production. (Gov't Opp. at 192, Dkt. No. 204). The Court denied the motion, explaining that the Court lacked the power to order pretrial discl

son", United States Xidam , 84 F.3d 441, 442 (D.C. Cir. 1996)(per curiam , and "the safety of any other person and the community." United States I Rodriguez. 897 F. Supp. 1461, 1463 (S.D. Fla. 1995); IS U.S.C. § 3142(c). Cases Which Qualify For Detention Hearings: Section 3142(f) defines specific situa

on probable cause, the court commonly will schedule a consolidated preliminary and detention hearing at which the prosecution must make available "Jencks" statements. If a hup://10.173.2.12/usao/cousa/olc/usaboolddrug/26drug.lum 4/10/2008 EFTA00191628 Federal Narcotics Prosecutions - Chapter 26 P