Legal Opinion

United States v. Heine

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided April 28, 2016No. Case No. 3:15-cr-00238-SI-2Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT YATES’S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY

Michael H. Simon United States District Judge

Defendant Diana Yates (“Yates”) and her co-defendant Dan Heine (“Heine”) are charged with conspiracy to commit bank fraud and making false bank entries, reports, and transactions during the time that they were affiliated with The Bank of Oswego (the “Bank”). Before the Court is Yates’s Motion for Additional Discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure (“Rule”) 16(a) and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). For the reasons that follow,…

2Cases cited50 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

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

Powered by the Exa API