Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
U.S. v. David Edmonds (Opposition to DOJ Motion to Exclude Defendant's Expert Witnesses)

U.S. v. David Edmonds (Opposition to DOJ Motion to Exclude Defendant's Expert Witnesses)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 118 |Likes:
Published by Mike Koehler

More info:

Published by: Mike Koehler on May 31, 2012
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

11/19/2012

pdf

text

original

 
l
Thomas
H.Bienert,Jr.(State
Bar
No.135311) tbienert@bmkatto
meys.com
2
BIENER
T.
MILLER
&
KATZMAN.
PL
C
903 CalleAmanecer,Suite350
:)
SanCll:'ment.e,
Calif
ornia
92673
4 Tel:
949
369·37001FaK;
94936
9·3701
Anom
eys
for
Defendant,
PAUL COSGROVE
56David
W.
Wiechert(State
Bar
No.
94607)
dwjechert@aQl.com
LAW
OFFICES
OF
DAVID
W.
WIECHE
RT
71 15
AvenidB
Miramar
8San
Clemente,
CA
92672
Tel: 9493628221Fax: 949496-6753
9
Attorne
ys
for
Defen<lant,
DAVID
EDMONDS
10
11
U
NITEQSTATE
S
DI
S
TRlCT
COU
RT
12
13
CE
NTRAL
DI
STRICT
OF
CALIFORN
IA
-SOUTHERNDIVISION
14
UNITED
STATES
OF
AMERlCA,
15
I.
17
v.
Plaintiff,
18
STUART
CARS
ON
et
aI
.,
Cas
eNo.
SA
CR·Q9-00077·!VS
DEFENDANTS'
OPPOSITION
TO
GOVERNMENT'S
MOTtON TO
EXCLUDEDEFENDANTS
'
EXPERT
WITNESSES
HearingDate: Hearing
Time:June
11
,20123:
30
p.m.
.
20
21
22
23
2'
25
2.
27
28
Defendants.
Co
unroom
:
___
__
_______
__
.J
Trial
Dat
e;
IOC
June
26,2012
Case 8:09-cr-00077-JVS Document 770 Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 30 Page ID #:13026
 
I
2
J
5
Defendants David Edmonds
and
PaulCosgrove("Defendants")hereby
fi
le
th
eirOpposition
to
theGovernment's Motion
to
Exclude Defendants'Expert Witnesse
s.
This
Op
position isbased uponthe attachedmemorandum
of
pointsandauthorities, the files
andrecords in thismatter,
as
well as
any
evidence
or
argwnent presentedat the hearing
on
thismatter
7 Dated:May
2\,
2012
BIENERT,
MI
LLER
&
KATZMAN,
PLC
8
9
10
"
12 Dated:
May2l
,
201
2
13
I'
15
I.
1718
19
20
21
22
23
2'
25
2.
27
28
By:
lsiTer
esa
CespedesAlarcOnlsf
Teresa
ces
pedesAlarcon AllomeysforDefendant
PAUL
COSGROVE
LAW
OFFICES
OF DAVID
W.WIECHERT
By:
/$/
David W
Wi
echertlsi
DavidW. Wiechert
Anomey
sforDefendant
DAVIDEDMONDS
Case 8:09-cr-00077-JVS Document 770 Filed 05/21/12 Page 2 of 30 Page ID #:13027
 
I
2
L
3
4
II
.
S
7
,
9
10
II
J2
13
14
IS
I.
17
IS
I'
20
2J
22
23
24
111
.
25
2.
27
28
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
I
I'(fRODUCfION
......................................................................................•.............1
ARGUMENT
.............................................................................................................2
A.
LegalStandard........................................................................
..
...
....................2
B.
Defendants'Expert
Disclosures ComplyWith
Rul
e16AndProvide
The
Gov
ernment
With A Fair Opportunity
To
Test
The
Merit
of
Their Testimony
Thr
oughFocusedCross-Examination................................
.4
I.
The
Instrumentality
Experts.................................................................
4
2.
The
Non-
Instrumentali
ty
6xpens
.......................................................... 7
C.
TheTestimon
y
Of
Def
ense
Expens
Koehler,M
o'-'ll'CY,
Sanderson,Simkins,Smollin AndRadus,IsRelevant
To
MaterialIssuesIn
The
Case,
Is
Not
UnfairlyPrejudicial,
And
Is
The Proper
Subject
Of
Expert
Testirrtony.................................................., ..... " ..........................
10
1.
Mi
chad
Koehler ............, .... "..................... " ..................." .......
12
2,
ScottMowrey..."..................................,.... , .............................
15
3.
Jihong
Sanderson......................................................................15
4.Christoph
er
Simkins..................................................................16
5.
Craig
Smollin......,................................."',.....
,,
........................
Ig
6. S.
Robert
Radus...............,.....................,', .... ,', .....".................. 19 D.Defen
dant
s Should
Be
Pe
mlittedToSupplement
Their
Disclosu
resToThe
E:<:tent
The
Coun Finds
Them
Defici
ent
Be
cause
Any
Deficie
nc
yWas
Not
Willful
AndDefendants'
E:<:pert
sAreEssential
To
TheDefense.............................. ".............................,...
,,
..........
21
CONC
LUSI
ON
........................................................................................................23
,
Case 8:09-cr-00077-JVS Document 770 Filed 05/21/12 Page 3 of 30 Page ID #:13028

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)//-->