United States v. Lua

Full title: United States of America v. Christina Lua, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

Date published: Mar 14, 2024

Criminal Action 21-CR-10208-NMG-11 (D. Mass. Mar. 14, 2024)

Opinion

Criminal Action 21-CR-10208-NMG-11

03-14-2024

United States of America v. Christina Lua, Defendant.

Nathaniel M. Gorton, United States District Judge.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Nathaniel M. Gorton, United States District Judge.

Defendant Christina Lua ("defendant") filed a motion for a bill of particulars regarding venue (Docket No. 466). She contends that the government should be required to identify the specific factual allegations that establish venue in Massachusetts. The government opposes the motion on grounds that a bill of particulars is warranted only where the information sought is required for a defense rather than merely helpful. It contends that the second superseding indictment satisfies the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 7(c) and that defendant has received voluminous discovery.

The Court will deny defendant's motion because:

1) the second superseding indictment properly identifies the elements of the crime,

2) it informs her of the nature of the charges against her and

3) defendant has received voluminous automatic discovery.

See United States v. Sepulveda, 15 F.3d 1161, 1192-93 (1st Cir. 1993) . The government has no obligation to categorize discovery, once produced.

ORDER

Defendant Christina Lua's motion for a bill of particulars regarding venue (Docket No. 466) is DENIED.

So ordered.