United States District Court, E.D. California
TRIAL CONFIRMATION ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Trial
in the above-captioned case, scheduled to commence at 9:00 AM
on September 6, 2016, was confirmed at the hearing held on
August 5, 2016.
EVIDENTIARY
DISPUTES
All
evidentiary disputes capable of being resolved by in limine
motions shall be set forth in such motions no later than
August 19, 2016. Oppositions to the motions or statements of
non-opposition shall be filed no later than August 26, 2016.
Hearing on the motions will commence at September 2, 2016 at
9:00 AM.
Any
reasonably anticipated dispute concerning the admissibility
of evidence that is not briefed in an in limine motion shall
be included in trial briefs. E.D. Cal. R. 285(a)(3).
TRIAL
PREPARATION
A. No
later than August 30, 2016, the following documents shall be
filed:[1]
(1)
proposed jury instructions and a proposed verdict form;
(2)
proposed voir dire questions to be asked by the Court;
(3)
trial briefs; and
(4) a
joint statement or joint proposed jury instruction that can
be read to the jury during voir dire that explains the nature
of the case.
B. The
government’s exhibits shall be numbered with stickers.
Should the defendant elect to introduce exhibits at trial,
such exhibits shall be designated by alphabetical letter with
stickers. The parties may obtain exhibit stickers from the
Clerk’s Office.
C. The
parties estimate it will take approximately 5 court days to
try the case, which includes closing arguments. Each side
indicated 20 minutes is sufficient for voir dire, which may
be used after the judge completes judicial voir dire. Two
alternate jurors will be empaneled.
The
“struck jury” system will be used to select the
jury. The struck jury system is “designed to allow both
the prosecution and the defense a maximum number of
peremptory challenges. The venire . . . start[s] with about
3[6] potential jurors, from which the defense and the
prosecution alternate[] with strikes until a petite panel of
12 jurors remain[s].” Powers v Ohio, 499 U.S. 400,
404-05 (1991); see also U ...