Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.United States AttorneyROBERT E. DUGDALEAssistant United States AttorneyChief, Criminal DivisionDOUGLAS M. MILLER (SBN: 240398)Assistant United States Attorney NICOLA J. MRAZEK JEFFREY A. GOLDBERGSenior Trial Attorneys1300 United States Courthouse312 North Spring StreetLos Angeles, California 90012Telephone: (213) 894-2216Facsimile: (213) 894-6436Email: douglas.m.miller@usdoj.govAttorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICAUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIAUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff,v.ENRIQUE FAUSTINO AGUILAR  NORIEGA, ANGELA MARIAGOMEZ AGUILAR, KEITH E.LINDSEY, STEVE K. LEE, andLINDSEY MANUFACTURINGCOMPANY,Defendants.))))))))))))))CR No. 10-1031(A)-AHMGOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO THEDEFENDANTS’ SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF INSUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISSTHE INDICTMENT WITH PREJUDICE DUETO ALLEGED REPEATED ANDINTENTIONAL GOVERNMENTMISCONDUCT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTSAND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATIONS;EXHIBITSHearing: October 17, 2011, 3:00 p.m.(Courtroom 14)Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its attorneys of record, the UnitedStates Department of Justice, Criminal Division, Fraud Section, and the United StatesAttorney for the Central District of California (collectively, “the government”), hereby files
 
Case 2:10-cr-01031-AHM Document 642 Filed 09/05/11 Page 1 of 91 Page ID #:17302
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
its response to the defendants’ July 25, 2011 supplemental brief (DE #632) in support of their May 9, 2011 motion to dismiss the indictment with prejudice due to alleged repeated andintentional government misconduct (DE #505). The government’s response is based uponthe attached memorandum of points and authorities, declarations, and exhibits; the files andrecords in this matter; and any evidence or argument presented at any hearing on this matter.DATED:September 5, 2011Respectfully submitted,ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.United States AttorneyROBERT E. DUGDALEAssistant United States AttorneyChief, Criminal Division/s/DOUGLAS M. MILLER Assistant United States Attorney NICOLA J. MRAZEK JEFFREY A. GOLDBERGSenior Trial AttorneysCriminal Division, Fraud Section
ii
Case 2:10-cr-01031-AHM Document 642 Filed 09/05/11 Page 2 of 91 Page ID #:17303
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGETABLE OF AUTHORITIES
................................................v
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
...........................1
I.INTRODUCTION
...................................................1
II.SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
.........................................4
III.ARGUMENT
.......................................................7
A.The Government Did Not Commit Misconduct, Let Alone“Purposeful” and “Prejudicial” Misconduct That “Permeated”the Case
......................................................71.There Was No Misconduct During the Investigation
 
..............7a.Participation by the Prosecutors in the Drafting andEditing of Agent Binder’s Search Warrant Affidavit WasPermissible, and Their Inadvertent Inclusion of anInaccurate Statement Does Not Constitute Misconduct......8 b.The Government Did Not Lie to the Court aboutParticular ESI Language Contained in Agent Binder’sAffidavit..........................................11c.The Government Did Not Suggest to the Grand Jury ThatBecause ABB Had Engaged in Bribery Then LMC MustHave Also Engaged in Bribery........................132.The Government Did Not “Play Games” with its Witness Lists....15a.The Government Was Not Required to Call Every Person Named on its Original Witness List, and Sufficient Notice Was Given Regarding the Five Witnesses Not Named on That List.................................15 b.The Government’s Submission of an Over-Inclusive Listof Possible Witnesses for the Purposes of Voir Dire WasPrudent and Not Misconduct..........................18c.The Inclusion of One CFE Official’s Name in the
 
Government’s Early Witness Lists Is Not “Emblematic”of Any Government “Deception”......................19
Case 2:10-cr-01031-AHM Document 642 Filed 09/05/11 Page 3 of 91 Page ID #:17304
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.

    • More From This User

    48 p.
    SEC v. Ashland Oil
    Mike Koehler
    32 Reads
    18 p.
    Ralph Lauren Corp. Non-Prosecution Agreement
    Mike Koehler
    327 Reads
    25 p.
    U.S. v. Pierucci (Indictment)
    Mike Koehler
    624 Reads
    12 p.
    U.S. v. Rothschild (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    305 Reads
    7 p.
    U.S. v. Rothschild (Plea Agreement)
    Mike Koehler
    296 Reads
    76 p.
    TJGEM Complaint
    Mike Koehler
    134 Reads
    18 p.
    U.S. v. Parker Drilling (DPA)
    Mike Koehler
    160 Reads
    15 p.
    U.S. v. Parker Drilling (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    150 Reads
    19 p.
    U.S. v. Uhl (Plea Agreement)
    Mike Koehler
    232 Reads
    3 p.
    U.S. v. Dubois (DOJ Motion for Downward Departure)
    Mike Koehler
    396 Reads
    21 p.
    DuBois Plea Agreement
    Mike Koehler
    185 Reads
    7 p.
    U.S. v. DuBois (Motion to Seal)
    Mike Koehler
    387 Reads
    12 p.
    U.S. v. Uhl (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    457 Reads
    14 p.
    U.S. v. DuBois (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    199 Reads
    22 p.
    U.S. v. Jensen (Indictment)
    Mike Koehler
    329 Reads
    21 p.
    U.S. v. Kowalewski (Indictment)
    Mike Koehler
    348 Reads
    1 p.
    The Story of George McLean
    Mike Koehler
    192 Reads
    20 p.
    SEC v. Straub (Defendants' Motion for Interlocutory Appeal)
    Mike Koehler
    288 Reads
    29 p.
    SEC v. Jackson/Ruehlen (Joint Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint)
    Mike Koehler
    254 Reads
    23 p.
    SEC v. Steffan (Opinion and Order Granting Motion to Dismiss)
    Mike Koehler
    472 Reads
    13 p.
    Statement of Facts - Griffiths Energy Enforcement Action (Canada)
    Mike Koehler
    155 Reads
    22 p.
    SEC v. Straub (Decision on Motion to Dismiss)
    Mike Koehler
    1305 Reads
    88 p.
    U.S. v. Duperval (Duperval Appellate Brief)
    Mike Koehler
    343 Reads
    15 p.
    U.S. v. Siriwan (DOJ Response)
    Mike Koehler
    223 Reads
    58 p.
    SEC v. Jackson/Ruehlen Amended Complaint
    Mike Koehler
    390 Reads
    Notes
    Load more