DOJ-OGR-00004089.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 267 Filed 05/03/21 Page6éof7 The Hon. Alison J. Nathan May 3, 2021 Page 6 F.3d at 145—46. Nor do the procedural and statutory rules affect the defense’s right to Brady information prior to trial. See Docket No. 68 (“The Government shall disclose [Brady] information to the defense promptly after its existence becomes known to the Government so that the defense may make effective use of the information in the preparation of its case.”); accord Fed. R. Crim. P. 5(f); United States v. Rodriguez, 496 F.3d 221, 226 (2d Cir. 2007) (“the Government must make disclosures in sufficient time that the defendant will have a reasonable opportunity to act upon the information efficaciously”). In sum, Ms. Maxwell will be able to identify any relevant defense witnesses and exhibits that she may need to introduce in a defense case only after the government concludes the presentation of its evidence at trial. Evidence may, or may not, be necessary after the government concludes its case-in-chief. Ms. Maxwell’s proposal is reasonable and will avoid any unnecessary trial delays because it is unlikely that any Rule 26.2 statements not already in the possession of the government, if they exist, will be voluminous or complicated. Government’s Position Consistent with the position set forth in its April 21, 2021 letter to the Court, the Government proposes that defense counsel provide a proposed witness list and witness statements pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26.1 four weeks in advance of trial. Such a production schedule would be consistent with the Government's agreement to provide Jencks Act material seven weeks in advance of trial, which is significantly before the Government is obligated to produce such material under the relevant statute. Production in advance of trial will also ensure adequate time for the Government to file any relevant motions and to prepare any rebuttal case as appropriate. The defense proposal to delay production of DOJ-OGR-00004089