UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-80140-CR-CANNON/REINHART

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

RAUL PEREZ-CANELO, 

Defendant.

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DISCOVERY ORDER

The United States respectfully responds to the Standing Discovery Order. This 

response also complies with Local Rule 88.10 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 

16.

A. 1. The government is unaware of any written or recorded statements made by 

the defendant.

2. The government has provided the reports which detail the oral statements 

made by the defendant before or after arrest in response to interrogation by 

any person then known to the defendant to be a government agent that the 

government intends to use at trial.

3. The defendant did not testify before the Grand Jury.

4. The NCIC record of the defendant has been provided to the defense.

5. Books, papers, documents, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or 

places which the government intends to use as evidence at trial to prove its 

case in chief, or were obtained or belonging to the defendant may be 

inspected at a mutually convenient time at the Office of the United States 

Attorney, 500 S. Australian Ave, Florida. Please call the undersigned to set 

up a date and time that is convenient to both parties.

6. A report analyzing and comparing the fingerprint sample provided by the 

defendant following his arrest in this case with the fingerprints in his alien 

file has been provided to the defense.

B. DEMAND FOR RECIPROCAL DISCOVERY: The United States requests the 

disclosure and production of materials enumerated as items 1, 2 and 3 of Section 

Case 9:22-cr-80140-AMC Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2023 Page 1 of 4
2

B of the Standing Discovery Order. This request is also made pursuant to Rule 

16(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

C. Information or material which may be favorable on the issues of guilt or punishment 

within the scope of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and United States v. 

Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976) has been provided to the defense.

D. No payments, promises of immunity, leniency, preferential treatment, or other 

inducements have been made to prospective government witnesses within the 

scope of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972) or Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 

264 (1959).

E. The government does not currently expect to call any conspirator, accomplice or 

informant at trial. The government will disclose any criminal record of any such 

witness.

F. No defendant was identified in a lineup, show up, photo spread or similar 

identification proceedings.

G. The government has advised its agents and officers involved in this case to 

preserve all rough notes.

H. The government will timely advise the defendant of its intent, if any, to introduce 

during its case in chief proof of evidence pursuant to F.R.E. 404(b). You are hereby 

on notice that all evidence made available to you for inspection, as well as all 

statements disclosed herein or in any future discovery letter, may be offered in the 

trial of this cause, under F.R.E. 404(b) or otherwise (including the inextricablyintertwined doctrine).

I. The defendant is not an aggrieved person, as defined in Title 18, United States 

Code, Section 2510(11), of any electronic surveillance.

J. The government has transcribed the Grand Jury testimony of all witnesses who 

will testify for the government at the trial of this cause.

K. No contraband is involved in this indictment.

L. The government does not know of any automobile, vessel, or aircraft allegedly 

used in the commission of this offense that is in the government's possession.

M. The defendant has been identified by prior fingerprint records, as detailed in the 

discovery attachments. The government is not aware of any latent fingerprints or 

palm prints which have been identified by a government expert as those of the 

defendant.

N. The defendant has requested disclosure of the subject-matter of expert testimony 

that the government reasonably expects to offer at trial. If the case goes to trial, 

Case 9:22-cr-80140-AMC Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2023 Page 2 of 4
3

the government intends to offer the expert testimony of an expert in the field of 

fingerprint analysis, as discussed above.

The government hereby demands a written summary of expert testimony that the 

defense reasonably expects to offer at trial pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of 

the Federal Rules of Evidence, describing the witnesses' opinions, the bases and 

the reasons for those opinions, and the witnesses' qualifications.

O. The government will make every possible effort in good faith to stipulate to all facts 

or points of law the truth and existence of which is not contested and the early 

resolution of which will expedite trial. These stipulations will be discussed at the 

discovery conference.

P. At the discovery conference, the government will seek written stipulations to 

agreed facts in this case, to be signed by the defendant and defense counsel.

The government is aware of its continuing duty to disclose such newly discovered 

additional information required by the Standing Discovery Order, Rule 16(c) of the Federal 

Rules of Criminal Procedure, Brady, Giglio, Napue, and the obligation to assure a fair 

trial.

On July 20, 2023, the government emailed 47 pages of discovery to assigned 

counsel.

Respectfully submitted,

MARKENZY LAPOINTE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: s/Susan Osborne

Assistant United States Attorney

Court ID# A5500797 

500 S. Australian Avenue, Suite 400

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Tel: (561) 209-1003

susan.osborne@usdoj.gov

Case 9:22-cr-80140-AMC Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2023 Page 3 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on July 20, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing using 

CM/ECF. 

s/Susan Osborne

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 9:22-cr-80140-AMC Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2023 Page 4 of 4