EFTA00016206.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: data-set-8

Extracted text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
GHISLAINE MAXWELL,
Defendant.
:
20 Cr. 330 (MN)
x
GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OFFERED BY
THE GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. EVID. 404(b) FOR FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH THE RULE'S NOTICE REQUIREMENT
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca
Laura A. Menninger
HADDON. MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C.
Deer
Phone:
Christian R. Everdell
COHEN & GRESSER LLP
York, NY 10022
Phone:
Bobbi C. Sternheim
Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim
New York NY 10007
Phone:
Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell
EFTA00016206

TABLE OF CONTENTS
BACKGROUND
1
I.
2020 Amendments to Rule 404(b)
1
II. Rule 404(b) Notice in This Case
2
ARGUMENT
4
I.
By Failing to Comply with the Rule 404(b) Notice Requirement, the Government Has
Waived the Admission of Any Evidence Pursuant to the Rule
4
II. Should the Government's Failure Be Excused, Ms. Maxwell Requests an Opportunity to
Rebut any Proffered Non-Propensity Purpose and Basis
5
III. Ms. Maxwell Needs Additional Time to Respond to the Scant Notice that the Materials
Qualify as "Direct Evidence" in the Case
6
CONCLUSION
7
EFTA00016207

TABLES OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
United States v. Brand, 467 F.3d 179 (2d Cir. 2006)
4
United States v. Bid, 859 F. App'x 610 (2d Cir. 2021)
4
Other Authorities
Wright & Miller, 22B Fed. Prac. & Proc. Evid., § 5242.1 2020 Amendments to Rule 404(b)
(2021)
2, 6
Rules
Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)
passim
ii
EFTA00016208

Ghislaine Maxwell moves in limine to exclude any evidence the Government seeks to
admit at trial under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) (the "Rule"). That Rule, as amended in December
2020, expressly requires particularized notice to the defense of the exact evidence to be offered,
an articulated non-propensity purpose for its admission, and the reasoning supporting that
purpose. Despite notice of the rule change and an opportunity to comply with the Rule by this
Court's deadline of October 11,…

Open in the interactive archive →