United States v. Cox

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. WINONA JEAN COX, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON

Date published: Apr 16, 2015

Criminal Case No. 14-cr-00085-JMH (E.D. Ky. Apr. 16, 2015)

Opinion

Criminal Case No. 14-cr-00085-JMH

04-16-2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. WINONA JEAN COX, Defendant.

Joseph M. Hood Senior U.S. District Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

***

This matter is before the Court upon the Plaintiff's Motion in Limine [DE 47]. The court has considered the United States' arguments presented in that Motion, as well as the response prepared by the defendant herself [DE 58], and the United States' Reply in further support of its Motion [DE 61]. The United States' request for relief is well taken for all of the reasons set forth in its Motion in Limine, which the Court incorporates into this Memorandum Opinion and Order as its own reasoning.

Simply stated, the charges against Defendant are brought by the United States, a sovereign, by and through its attorney under the laws of the United States and in the proper forum against a defendant subject to those laws and without any privilege against or immunity from those charges. This Court has jurisdiction to hear this matter and pronounce judgment with respect to the defendant.

Only relevant evidence, i.e., that evidence which "has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence" and which constitutes facts "of consequence in determining the action" is admissible at trial. See Fed. R. Evid. 401 and 402. Therefore, it is appropriate and, in this Court's mind, necessary to enter an order limiting the evidence to be presented at trial in order to avoid the suggestion of inadmissible evidence - such as that set forth in Defendant's Response to the Motion in Limine - to the jury. See Fed. R. Evid. 103(d) ("To the extent practicable, the court must conduct a jury trial so that inadmissible evidence is not suggested to the jury by any means.").

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

(1) That the United States' Motion in Limine [DE 47] is GRANTED and

(2) That Defendant, her counsel, and her witnesses are PROHIBITED from making any statement or argument, asking any question, or putting forth any evidence, either directly or indirectly, while in the presence of the jury concerning Defendant's claimed status as an Indian, her claimed residence on an Indian reservation, or her claimed immunity from federal tax or criminal laws or the Court's jurisdiction.

This the 16th day of April, 2015.

Signed By:

Joseph M. Hood

Senior U.S. District Judge