Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-30854House OversightDeposition

Proposed Amendments to Federal Rules of Evidence on Public-Authority Defenses and Victims’ Deposition Rights

The document discusses suggested procedural changes to Rules 12.3 and 15 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. It mentions no specific individuals, agencies, financial flows, or misconduct, and offers no Proposes parallel amendment to Rule 12.3 mirroring Rule 12.1 for public-authority defenses. Specifies disclosure timelines for government and defense witnesses. Suggests amendment to Rule 15 to allow

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017662
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The document discusses suggested procedural changes to Rules 12.3 and 15 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. It mentions no specific individuals, agencies, financial flows, or misconduct, and offers no Proposes parallel amendment to Rule 12.3 mirroring Rule 12.1 for public-authority defenses. Specifies disclosure timelines for government and defense witnesses. Suggests amendment to Rule 15 to allow

Tags

evidence-rulespublic-authority-defenselegal-procedurelegal-reformhouse-oversightvictim-rightsprocedural-guidancerule-amendment

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Page 27 of 78 2007 Utah L. Rev. 861, *898 way street." 7!* In any event, protecting victims from serious harm is certainly a strong state interest that would justify any incidental effect on defense preparations for trial. Finally, however one ends up on the proper formulation of the address issue under Rule 12.1 (governing alibi defenses), the same formulation ought to be used in Rule 12.3 (governing public-authority defenses). Although I made this recommendation in a previous article, 714 the Advisory Committee appears to have overlooked this parallel provision in need of amendment. So that it is not overlooked again, I will set out the proposal in full. Tracking my recommendations for Rule 12.1, I recommended a parallel amendment to Rule 12.3 as follows: [*899] Rule 12.3 Notice of a Public-Authority Defense (4) Disclosing Witnesses. (A) Government's Request. An attorney for the government may request in writing that the defendant disclose the name, address, and telephone number of each witness and the address and telephone number of each witness (other than the victim) the defendant intends to rely on to establish a public-authority defense. An attorney for the government may serve the request when the government serves its response to the defendant's notice under Rule 12.3(a)(3), or later, but must serve the request no later than 20 days before trial. (B) Defendant's Response. Within 7 days after receiving the government's request, the defendant must serve on an attorney for the government a written statement of the name, address and telephone number of each witness. and the address and telephone number of each witness (other than the victim). (C) Government's Reply. Within 7 days after receiving the defendant's statement, an attorney for the government must serve on the defendant or the defendant's attorney a written statement of the name, address, and telephone number of each witness, and the address and telephone number of each witness (other than the victim), the government intends to rely on to oppose the defendant's public-authority defense. (b) Continuing Duty to Disclose. Both an attorney for the government and the defendant must promptly disclose in writing to the other party the name, address, and telephone number of any additional witness and the address and telephone number of each witness (other than the victim) if: (1) the disclosing party learns of the witness before or during trial; and (2) the witness should have been disclosed under Rule 12.3(a)(4) if the disclosing party had known of the witness earlier. *!4 [*900] Rule 15 - Victims’ Right to Attend Pre-Trial Depositions The Proposals: I proposed amending Rule 15 to allow victims to attend any public depositions as follows: (i) Victims Can Attend. Victims can attend any public deposition taken under this rule under the same conditions as govern a victim's attendance at trial. 7}5 212° Wardius v. Oregon, 412 U.S. 470, 475 (1973). iS) 3 Cassell, Proposed Amendments, supra note 4, at 873. iS) 4 Apparently in response to my argument, the Advisory Committee has just proposed an amendment to Rule 12.3 paralleling its amendment to Rule 12.1. See infra notes 585-587 and accompanying text. i) > Cassell, Proposed Amendments, supra note 4, at 874. DAVID SCHOEN

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: RE: Schoen and Epstein

From: To: Subject: RE: Schoen and Epstein Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2019 19:09:33 +0000 Attachments: (USANYS)" < Sorry, I mean to send this to you a while ago. More of the same from him. From: Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 2:04 PM To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Schoen and Epstein It is literally unimaginable. From: (USANYS) < Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2019 22:38 To: Subject: Re: Schoen and Epstein Can you imagine moving forward with that case with David Schoen as the "quarterback" of the defense team? Yikes. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2019, at 9:06 PM, ) < > wrote: I got a hit on this as an end-of-year thing from my google alert on Epstein - I had not realized that he did a huge, crazy, absurdly self-aggrandizing interview on this!! https://atlantajewishtimes.timesofisrael.comijeffrey-epstein-consulted-atlanta-attomey-days-before-death/ I don't believe a word of his. Just unreal. From: Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 20:00 To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Schoen an

2p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00026451

0p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02541489

4p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01763941

9p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Proposal to Require Victim Input on Nolo Contendere Pleas Cited in CVRA Subcommittee Discussion

The passage outlines a procedural reform suggestion for federal criminal sentencing and notes an apparent oversight by the Advisory Committee. While it mentions Senator Feinstein, it does not provide Advocates amending Rule 11(a)(3) to require courts to consider victims' views before accepting a nol Senator Dianne Feinstein is quoted supporting broader victim rights under the Crime Victims' Right

1p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02456600

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.