Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Spanier Pretrial Binder3

Spanier Pretrial Binder3

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,138|Likes:
Published by Adam Michael Sacks
Jeff Spanier fraud case pretrial documents.
Jeff Spanier fraud case pretrial documents.

More info:

Categories:Types, Brochures
Published by: Adam Michael Sacks on May 05, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/05/2013

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
TIMOTHY A. SCOTT
California Bar No. 215074LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY A. SCOTT1350 Columbia Street, Suite 600San Diego, California 92101Telephone: (619) 794-0451Facsimile: (619) 652-9964Email: tscott@timscottlaw.comAttorneys for Jeffrey Spanier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
(HONORABLE ROGER T. BENITEZ)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,)Case No. 12cr0918-BEN)Plaintiff,))Date:April 23, 2013v.)Time: 9:30 a.m.)
 
JEFFREY SPANIER,)Notice of motions and motions
in limine
:)Defendant.)1.To exclude victim-impact evidence at trial.))2.To exclude evidence of lavish lifestyle.))3.To exclude evidence of prior lawsuits absent)proof of notice to Mr. Spanier.))4.To preclude financial “community safety)arguments.))5.To preclude 404, 608, and 609 evidence.))6.To preclude expert witness testimony without)adequate notice.))7.To permit attorney-conducted voir dire. _________________________________ )Mr. Spanier, by and through counsel, asks that the Court grant the above-captionedmotions
in limine
.Dated: April 9, 2013Respectfully submitted,
S/ Timothy A. Scott 
TIMOTHY A. SCOTT
Attorneys for Mr. Spanier 
Case 3:12-cr-00918-BEN Document 150 Filed 04/09/13 Page 1 of 1
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
TIMOTHY A. SCOTT
California Bar No. 215074LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY A. SCOTT, APC1350 Columbia Street, Suite 600San Diego, California 92101Telephone: (619) 652-9970Facsimile: (619) 652-9964email: tscott@timscottlaw.comAttorneys for Jeffrey Spanier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
(HONORABLE ROGER T. BENITEZ)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,)Case No.
12cr0918-BEN
)Plaintiff,)Date:April 23, 2013)Time:9:30 a.m.v.))Memorandum in support of motions
in limine
.JEFFREY SPANIER, ))Defendant.)
 
)
I.Introduction
Mr. Spanier respectfully moves
in limine
to exclude the following evidence at trial. Healso moves for attorney-conducted voir dire at trial.
112cr0918-BEN
Case 3:12-cr-00918-BEN Document 150-1 Filed 04/09/13 Page 1 of 7
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
II.
Motions in LimineA.Victim-impact testimony should be precluded because it is inflammatory andirrelevant at trial.
The government’s
in limine
filings in this case have included inflammatory and—as tothe merits of the trial— irrelevant “victim-impact” evidence. For example, the government points out that one investor planned to use his stock holdings for his retirement.
1
Another victim is apparently bankrupt as a result of Argyll’s sale of his stock.
2
This evidence, whilecertainly sympathetic and unquestionably relevant for purposes of sentencing, has no place before the jury. Victim impact does not make any questions at trial more or less likely. For example, consider the converse: if some of the government’s victims are fabulously wealthy (assome appear to be) would it be relevant if they barely missed their stock, financially speaking?If the theft of their stock did not harm them financially at all in the grand scheme of things?
3
Itis difficult to imagine the defense being permitted to show the jury that some victims are stillrich, so the government should not be permitted to prove that some victims are now poor.Impact on the victim, again, would be appropriate in the event of a sentencing. But is whollyinappropriate, irrelevant, and unduly prejudicial in the context of a jury trial. Mr. Spanier movesto exclude any evidence of this sort under Rules 401, 402, and 403.
B.Evidence about the size of Mr. Spanier’s home, his allegedly “lavish” lifestyle andsimilar evidence should also be precluded because it is designed to prejudice the jury and lacks probative value.
Whenever the government talks about the facts of this case, it is always sure to includeinflammatory details about the defendants so-called “lavish lifestyles.” For example, in itsmotions in limine, the government asserts:
 
1
See
Government Motions in Limine, at 5.
 
2
 Id.
 
3
To be clear, McClain and Miceli stole the stock. Mr. Spanier did not. He believed thatthey were complying with the written contracts and his representations.
212cr0918-BEN
Case 3:12-cr-00918-BEN Document 150-1 Filed 04/09/13 Page 2 of 7

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->