Opinion
5:22-cr-00251-EJD-1
02-28-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BRIAN BRODERICK, Defendant.
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBITS
RE: DKT. NO. 138
EDWARD J. DAVILA, United States District Judge
Before the Court are Defendant's additional objections to the Government's trial exhibits 1-23 (“Exhibits”) filed on February 14, 2024. Def.'s Obj. to Gov. Trial Ex. (“Def. Obj”), ECF No. 138. The Court heard oral arguments from both Parties on Defendant's objections during the February 22, 2024, Pretrial Conference. ECF No. 147.
Defendant does not object to Exhibits 2, 3, 5, or 14, and the Parties informed the Court that the Government has withdrawn Exhibits 1, 4, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 17. The Government also indicated that they do not plan to introduce Exhibit 11 currently but may seek introduction at a later time. The Court will rule on any objections to Exhibit 11 should that time arise. The Court also issued oral rulings regarding the emails between Mr. Broderick and Agent Salazar in Exhibits 6 and 7, specifying redactions to be made pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence (“FRE”) 403 and the Court's prior order suppressing evidence stemming from the March 11, 2022, traffic stop. See ECF No. 147.
Thus, the only remaining objections to be decided at this time are Defendant's objections to the YouTube videos in Exhibits 8 and 9. The Court took these objections under submission following oral arguments on February 22, 2024. ECF No. 147. For the reasons stated below, the Court SUSTAINS Defendant's objection to Exhibit 8 and OVERRULES Defendant's objection to Exhibit 9.
Exhibit 8: YouTube Video, “Unionist”
Exhibit 8 is a YouTube video recorded by Mr. Broderick depicting Mr. Broderick in his car presumably on route to the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Department prior to the March 11, 2022, traffic stop, which the Court later found constituted an unlawful prolonged detention and de facto arrest. Mr. Broderick is seen discussing the gun violence restraining order and his plan to turn over his weapons to the Sheriff's Department. It appears this video was recorded and posted months prior to Mr. Broderick's initial interactions with Agent Salazar. Accordingly, the Court finds this evidence irrelevant under FRE 402 given the timing and content of the video relative to the charged conduct, as well as unduly prejudicial under FRE 403 given Mr. Broderick's statements in the video regarding weapons and the restraining order.
The Court therefore SUSTAINS Defendant's objection to Exhibit 8.
Exhibit 9: YouTube Video, “I find out FBI is investigating me . . . ”
Exhibit 9 is a YouTube video recorded by Mr. Broderick depicting Mr. Broderick in his car surveilling an FBI office and discussing his general disdain for the FBI, including at one point specifically discussing Agent Salazar. While it is unclear when this video was recorded, Mr. Broderick posted the video on June 1, 2022, the same day as his alleged threatening email to Agent Salazar. The Court finds that this evidence is relevant to the charged conduct under FRE 402 and more probative than prejudicial under FRE 403 as to the issue of intent given that the video was posted contemporaneously with the alleged threat.
The Court therefore OVERRULES Defendant's objection to Exhibit 9.
IT IS SO ORDERED.