IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00355-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. WAUNITA WEINGART,

2. JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS,

3. ALOIS CRAIG WEINGART,

Defendants.

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION TO CONTINUE JURY TRIAL (DOC. 124)

The United States of America, by and through United States Attorney John F. Walsh

and Assistant United States Attorneys Linda Kaufman and Martha Paluch, responds to

Defendant’s Motion to Continue Jury Trial, filed by Defendant John Phillip Gallegos, as

follows:

1. The government does not dispute that defense counsel may have a

legitimate need for more time to prepare for trial in this matter. The government therefore

does not object to the granting of a continuance of the September 17, 2012, trial date

consistent with the limitations of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161.

2. The recent production of evidence has been voluminous. The government

disclosed Certified Fraud Examiner Dana Chamberlin’s Rule 702 report on August 2, 2012,

to which a substantial number of summary charts were attached. The government also

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 126 filed 08/20/12 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 5
provided the defendants with numerous reports of recent witness interviews and some

additional documents.

3. As the government continues to prepare for trial, it will continue to provide

additional discovery consistent with its obligations pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 16 and Brady

v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny. It is counsels’ practice to disclose

Jencks material in advance of the time required by 18 U.S.C. § 3500. Accordingly, the

government intends to provide such reports as they become available.

4. Defendant Gallegos’ characterizations of the evidence, however, warrant

comment. He claims that the number of witnesses the government intends to call is

“unexpected” and “completely unanticipated and unanticipatable.” Given the duration of

the fraud, the nature of the scheme, and the number of loans identified in the indictment,

it bears to reason that the government would be calling a substantial number of witnesses

in its case-in-chief. While it is true that many witnesses, most of whom are loan brokers,

loan officers, underwriters, and lenders’ closers, have recently been interviewed for the first

time in this case, they have not been “newly discovered” as Defendant Gallegos repeatedly

asserts. The names of almost all of these witnesses and their respective roles in the

subject loan transactions were contained in the original discovery provided to the

defendants. Other witnesses have been re-interviewed as part of the government’s trial

preparation.

5. The government does not intend to call witnesses that are unnecessary to

prove an aspect of the charged offenses or whose testimony will be merely cumulative, and

may not call all of the witnesses on its current list. On the other hand, the government does

intend to be prepared to call any witness as necessary (in addition to mere custodians) to

2

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 126 filed 08/20/12 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 5
lay the proper foundation for the admission of its numerous exhibits and to establish the

extensive scheme charged. The government anticipates that most of its witnesses’

testimony should be relatively short.

6. The government has agreed to produce custodial declarations and proposed

stipulations when they are ready. The first of those will be ready, as stated, this week.

7. The government has produced criminal records of the defendants consistent

with Rule 16. As to the criminal history of its witnesses, the government understands its

obligation to make discoverable impeachment information available to the defendants in

a timely fashion.

8. Undersigned counsel have conferred with counsel for Defendant

John Gallegos, who has confirmed that he is not seeking a continuance of the defendant’s

August 24, 2012, expert disclosure deadline, or of the August 31, 2012, deadline for the

parties to file a joint motion for a Rule 702 hearing. Counsel for Defendant John Gallegos

has stated he reserves the right to move for leave of Court to address any legal issue or

potential expert testimony issue raised solely/exclusively by the discovery provided by the

government on or after August 3, 2012.

Respectfully submitted this 20th day of August, 2012.

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

By: s/ Linda Kaufman 

Linda Kaufman

Assistant United States Attorney

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, Colorado 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0100

Facsimile: (303) 454-0404

e-mail: Linda.Kaufman@usdoj.gov

3

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 126 filed 08/20/12 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 5
By: s/ Martha A. Paluch 

Martha A. Paluch

Assistant United States Attorney

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, Colorado 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0100

Facsimile: (303) 454-0404

e-mail: martha.paluch@usdoj.gov

4

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 126 filed 08/20/12 USDC Colorado pg 4 of 5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 20th day of August, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO CONTINUE JURY

TRIAL with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of

such filing to the following e-mail addresses:

Martin A. Stuart, Esq.

e-mail: martinstuartlaw@solucian.com

William L. Taylor, Esq.

e-mail: wltaylorpc@gmail.com

Paula M. Ray, Esq.

e-mail: paulamray@earthlnk.net

 s/Maggie E. Grenvik 

Maggie E. Grenvik

Legal Assistant

U.S. Attorney's Office

1225 17th St., Suite 700

Denver, CO 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0100

Fax: (303) 454-0401

e-mail: maggie.grenvik@usdoj.gov

5

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 126 filed 08/20/12 USDC Colorado pg 5 of 5