DOJ-OGR-00020862.jpg

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 22-1426, Document 58_02/28/2023, 3475901, Page36 of 221 A-236 3153 LCSCMAXT conduct that occurs solely in New Mxico, travels to and from New Mexico, solely in New Mxico cannot formthe basis for a violation of New York law -- THE COURT: Again, using your language, cannot forma basis, would suggest it is irrelevant. I'll say that is wrong as a legal matter, number 1. Nunber 2, you didn't seek to exclude that testimony, nor did you seek a limting instruction wth respect to that testimony, and I think that was quite ripe for all of the reasons we've articulated. MR. EVERDELL: Yes. Although, I would point out we did, in the charging conference, request the inclusion of travel from Florida to New York to make clear that that was the required facts to be proven for those counts. In any event, I think this is a time that calls for a supplenental instruction. I understand the Court has rejected -- THE COURT: I'mnot going to give theman incorrect supplenental instruction. MR EVERDELL: If the Court thinks the instruction that was proposed is incorrect, we can certainly work to draft a correct one. I think the jury is saying that they my convict M. Mixwell on Count Four based on conduct that solely relates to New Mxico. I amnot saying it is irrelevant. What I amsaying is if all they had —which is what I think the note is saying —is travel to and from New Mxico and alleged sexual SOUTHERN DI STRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR- 00020862