Legal Opinion

United States v. Poulin

District Court, D. Maine

Decided December 1, 2008No. CR-08-50-B-WPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS AND FOR A COPY OF EACH IMAGE UPON WHICH THIS PROSECUTION IS PREDICATED

JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR., District Judge.

The Court denies the Defendant’s motion for a bill of particulars, because the Indictment complies with Rule 7(c) requirements and the Government has adopted an “open file” stance on the Defendant’s request for an itemization of the images upon which the Government’s prosecution is based.

I. STATEMENT OF FACTS

On March 12, 2008, a federal grand jury indicted Daniel Poulin for exploitation of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a).…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hamling v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. United States v. SepulvedaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
  3. United States v. CarllSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  4. United States v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. United States v. James Earl PaivaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States v. CameronDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2009
  2. United States v. CameronDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2009
  3. United States v. DeLaurentiisDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API