DOJ-OGR-00012758.jpg

be NO Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 _ Filed 08/10/22 Page 7 of 261 1147 LC6Cmaxl even if taken months or years after the time period in question if there is reason to believe the photo is probative of how the Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO WO a oO = be N Ww = Hs Oo a OY a ~] a oO a Ke) 20 21 22 23 24 25 scene appeared at the earlier time. See, for example, United States v. Causey, 748 F.3d 310, which is a Seventh Circuit decision from 2014. Typically, this inquiry turns on whether the photo depicts, quote, relatively enduring or fixed structures whose locations and arrangement in location to one another would not likely have changed, end quote, in the intervening time period. I'm quoting here from United States v. Smith, 2020WL5663433, which is a District of New Mexico 2020 decision. For example, the Seventh Circuit in the Causey case affirmed the admission of photographs of houses taken three and six years after the conspiracy ended, stating that, despite the Significant passage of time, the photos were relevant because they presented the jury with the layout, size, location, and composition of the houses. 748 F.3d at 316. Similarly, a Court in this circuit admitted crime scene photos of the interior of a restaurant taken nine months later where there was no argument that the photographs at issue did not fairly and accurately depict the interior of the restaurant. Walker v. Conway, 2007WL9225072, Western District of New York, June 25, 2007. The defense argues that admission of the photos is not merely a matter of relevance and prejudice under 401 and 403, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012758