DOJ-OGR-00011351.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 721 Filed 07/12/22 Page7of9 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan December 14, 2021 Page 7 permitting impeachment of defendant-attorney, on trial for tax fraud, with questions about his disbarment for misappropriating client funds); United States v. Weichert, 783 F.2d 23, 25—26 (2d Cir. 1986) (no error in ruling that government could impeach defendant-attorney, on trial for defrauding the United States and bankruptcy fraud, with questions about his disbarment); United States v. Whitehead, 618 F.2d 523, 528-29 (4th Cir. 1980) (no error in ruling that defendant- attorney, on trial for racketeering involving prostitution and bribery, could be impeached with questions about his suspension from practice from the Virginia State Bar for “conduct involving deceit or misrepresentation”); United States v. Rubenstein, 151 F.2d 915, 919 (2d Cir. 1945) (no error in permitting impeachment of defendant-attorney, on trial for conspiracy to bring into the country an alien by false representations by concealment of material facts and by false documents, with questions about his disbarment for committing fraud on the divorce court). These case do not apply here because: e The witnesses in those cases were offering substantive fact testimony. (In each of the cited cases the witness was also the defendant.) Mr. J is akin to a custodian of records, and he will do nothing more than authenticate and lay the foundation for the admission of a document. e The witnesses in those cases were impeached with questions about conduct that was probative of untruthfulness. Mr. gg is not alleged to have engaged in any conduct probative of untruthfulness, lying, deceit, or misrepresentation. e The witnesses in those cases were impeached with questions about conduct related or similar to the conduct that was the subject of the trial. Mr. HS 2!icocd conduct a) bas no relationship DOJ-OGR-00011351