Opinion
4:21-CR-40042-LLP
09-08-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RAY NOEL CAMACHO, SR., Defendant.
ORDER AS TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AT DOCKET NOS. 84 & 87
VERONICA L. DUFFY United States Magistrate Judge
Defendant Ray Noel Camacho is before the court on a superseding indictment charging him with conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance and conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(h) and 1956(a)(1)(B)(i). See Docket No. 28. Pending are Mr. Camacho's motions for assistance with discovery. See Docket Nos. 84 & 87. The United States (“government”) resists these motions. See Docket No. 85. These matters have been referred to this magistrate judge for determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and Local Rule 57.11.
Mr. Camacho first requests that portions of his discovery be exported into MP3, MP4, or PDF format. Docket Nos. 84 & 87. This request is similar to the one Mr. Camacho made in a previous motion, which this court denied. See Docket No. 65, p. 3; Docket No. 89, p. 12. In their response, the government acknowledged the issues Mr. Camacho is having with access to this electronica discovery. Docket No. 85. The government asserts they reached an agreement with Mr. Camacho's stand-by counsel, Mr. de Castro, to have the discovery hard drive returned so that the proper media players can be downloaded onto the discovery hard drive and returned to Mr. Camacho. The court believes this will adequately resolve the issues Mr. Camacho is having and thus Mr. Camacho's request is denied as moot.
Mr. Camacho also makes a request for Giglio discovery. Docket No. 84. This is the exact same request Mr. Camacho made in two previous motions, which the court also denied. See Docket No. 65, pp. 2-3; Docket No. 71, pp. 12; Docket No. 89, pp. 9-12. Because the government has assured Mr. Camacho that he will receive the relevant Giglio materials before trial, Mr. Camacho's request is denied.
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)
Finally, Mr. Camacho requests assistance with filing subpoenas. Docket No. 87. Mr. Camacho asserts he provided a list of names to Mr. de Castro that he wanted subpoenaed and has been unable to reach him. Id. Mr. Camacho also seems to take issue with the fact that the government will not release the personal addresses of the witnesses. Id. This court addressed Mr. Camacho's subpoena requests at length in its recent ex parte order. See Docket No. 93. Further, the government “is not required to inform [a defendant] of the address or whereabouts of any potential witness.” United States v. Roach, 28 F.3d 729, 734 (8th Cir. 1994). Thus, Mr. Camacho's request is denied. Mr. Camacho has the authority to make subpoena requests to this court under FED. R. CRIM. P. 17 (b) & (c) if he so chooses, as previously explained in this court's order at Docket No. 93.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing facts, law, and analysis, this court hereby
DENIES both of Defendant Ray Camacho's motions for assistance with discovery [Docket Nos. 84 & 87].