From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Ortega

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Oct 7, 2015
2:12-CR-00198 MCE (E.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2015)

Opinion

          BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, RICHARD J. BENDER, ROGER YANG, Assistant United States Attorneys, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff, United States of America.

          BENJAMIN D. GALLOWAY Attorney for Defendant 1-Steven Ortega, Sr.

          RANDY SUE POLLOCK Attorney for Defendant 2-Steven Ortega, Jr.

          SHARI RUSK Attorney for Defendant 3-Marla Ortega.

          DINA L. SANTOS Attorney for Defendant 4-Matt Ortega.

          HAYES H. GABLE, III Attorney for Defendant 6-Anthony Giarrusso.

          THOMAS JOHNSON Attorney for Defendant 7-Jay Dupee.

          WILLIAM E. BONHAM Attorney for Defendant 8-Brock Enrico.

          WILLIAM J. PORTANOVA Attorney for Defendant 10-Steven Adgate.

          DANNY D. BRACE, JR. Attorney for Defendant 11-Bryan Swiers.

          CLEMENTE M. JIMENEZ Attorney for Defendant 12-Kyle Schmidt.

          GREGORY W. FOX Attorney for Defendant 14-Charles Erickson.

          OLAF W. HEDBERG Attorney for Defendant 15-Travis Olibas.

          DAVID D. FISCHER Attorney for Defendant 16-Jake Westerman.

          SCOTT N. CAMERON Attorney for Defendant 17-Justin McMillian.

          CARL E. LARSON Attorney for Defendant 19-Frederick Laurens.

          DARRYL A. STALLWORTH Attorney for Defendant 21-Richard Serrell.

          ROBERT J. SARIA Attorney for Defendant 22-Kevin Kuester.

          RUSSELL S. HUMPHREY Attorney for Defendant 23-Derek Winters.

          CLYDE M. BLACKMON Attorney for Defendant 24-Richard Reynolds.

          MICHAEL JASON LAWLEY Attorney for Defendant 25-Nickolas Perry.

          JAMES A. BUSTAMANTE Attorney for Defendant 27-Kevin Kirkpatrick.

          PHILIP A. SCHNAYERSON Attorney for Defendant 28-Reginald Bell.

          MICHAEL E. HANSEN Attorney for Defendant 29-Michael Kelly.

          OMAR FIGUEROA Attorney for Defendant 32-Nicholas Ojeda.

          JAMES R. GREINER Attorney for Defendant 20-Jason Siegfried.

          Dan Koukol Attorney for Defendant 5-Marcus Williams.

          James J. Clark Attorney for Defendant 31-Robert Kennedy.


          AMENDED STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND ALL REMAINING DEFENDANTS

          MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

         STIPULATION

         Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendants, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

         1. This Court may enter protective orders pursuant to Rule 16(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and its general supervisory authority.

         2. This Stipulation and Order pertains to all discovery provided to or made available to Defense Counsel as part of discovery in this case (hereafter, collectively known as "the discovery").

         3. Defense counsel shall not disclose any of the discovery to any person other than their respective defendant/client, witnesses that they are interviewing or preparing for trial, or attorneys, law clerks, paralegals, secretaries, experts, and investigators involved in the representation of the defendant in connection to this criminal case.

         a. Defense counsel may permit the defendant/client to review the Protected Documents and Protected Information contained therein, but the defendant/client shall not be given control of any Protected Documents or Protected Information or be provided any copies of the Protected Documents or Protected Information.

         4. The discovery and information therein may only be used in connection with the litigation of this case and for no other purpose. The discovery is now and will forever remain the property of the United States Government. Defense counsel will return the discovery or certify that it has been shredded at the conclusion of the case and defense counsel's document retention obligations.

         5. In the event that the defendant obtains substitute counsel, undersigned defense counsel agrees to withhold the discovery from new counsel unless and until substituted counsel agrees to be bound by this order.

         6. Defense counsel will store the discovery in a secure place and will use reasonable care to ensure that it is not disclosed to third persons in violation of this agreement.

         7. If defense counsel makes, or causes to be made, any further copies of any of the discovery, defense counsel will inscribe the following notation on each copy: "U.S. Government Property; May Not Be Used Without U.S. Government Permission."

         8. If defense counsel releases custody of any of the discovery, or authorized copies thereof, to any person described in paragraph three, defense counsel shall provide such recipients with copies of this Order and advise that person that the discovery is the property of the United States Government, that the discovery and information therein may only be used in connection with the litigation of this case and for no other purpose, and that an unauthorized use of the discovery may constitute a violation of law and/or contempt of court.

         Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank

         9. Defense counsel shall be responsible for advising his or her respective defendant, employees and other members of the defense team, and defense witnesses of the contents of this Stipulation/Order.

         10. Defense counsel shall be responsible for advising his or her respective defendant, employees, and other members of the defense team, and also defense witnesses of the contents and scope of this Stipulation/Order

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

          ORDER

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Ortega

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Oct 7, 2015
2:12-CR-00198 MCE (E.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Ortega

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN ORTEGA, Sr. et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Oct 7, 2015

Citations

2:12-CR-00198 MCE (E.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2015)