Opinion ID: 662535
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Motion for Disclosure of Exculpatory Evidence

Text: 29 After the commencement of trial, Huebner's counsel filed a motion entitled Motion for Disclosure of Exculpatory Evidence (Rule 16). It stated that it was filed under the authority of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and contained 35 numbered requests, some with subdivisions. The second of 19 subdivisions of paragraph 20 requested All Documents maintained in the system of records known as Individual Master File (IMF) Treasury/IRS 24.030, which pertain to the Defendant. 30 The district court denied his motion without prejudice. The IMF was written in code, with numbers standing for events and procedures. Huebner contends that the district court's denial prevented him from effectively cross-examining a prosecution witness as to the accuracy of the IMF and its contents. He states that his counsel was unable to translate the document and was unaware of its evidentiary significance until trial, and that counsel could not possibly have known that the prosecution would make use of it. Huebner also contends that the court's ruling deprived him of his right to exculpatory evidence under Brady. 31 In response, the government states that, prior to trial, defense counsel had access to documents which translated the IMF into a readable form, as well as access to Certificates of Assessments and Payments, which had been prepared from the IMF and contained translations of its relevant information. Counsel's brief, although asserting generally that he had found inconsistencies in the IMF so great that the IMF document is literally fraudulent, and a fraud, a shame, a red herring, contains no description of any prejudicial use of the IMF at trial, and no demonstration of unfair prejudice nor that any information would have been exculpatory, so as to invoke Brady. 32 We find no error.