United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division
JUDGE KAREN L. HAYES
A. DOUGHTY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
before the Court is an “Objection to Ruling, Document
82 and Motion to Reconsider Denial to Defendant's Motion
in Limine of Government's Exhibits” (“Motion
to Reconsider”) [Doc. No. 84] filed by Defendant
Jmarreon Mack (“Mack”). Mack objects to and moves
the Court for reconsideration of its November 6, 2019
Memorandum Order [Doc. No. 82] denying Mack's Motion in
Limine regarding potential Government exhibits [Doc. No. 65].
to the extent that Mack re-urges his Motion in Limine with
regard to 107 of the 108 videos of Mack during visitation
while he was incarcerated on these charges, the Motion to
Reconsider is DENIED. The Government indicated that it does
not intend to offer any videos except one, and the Court can
rely on counsel's representation as an officer of the
the Court finds no reason to set aside or modify its
constitutional analysis with regard to photographs of the
grinder, digital scale, and clear plastic bags seized at the
time of Mack's arrest, but which were later destroyed
pursuant to Louisiana State Police policy. Thus, to this
extent, Mack's Motion to Reconsider is also DENIED.
Mack has raised issues which must be addressed by the Court.
Mack moves the Court to exclude the one video that the
Government intends to offer into evidence because it contains
double hearsay, reveals information conveyed during an
attorney-client conversation, and has no probative value
because Mack merely reports what counsel allegedly
“told” him. In the cited conversation, Mack is
discussing the vehicle in which he was stopped by police. The
car had been obtained from Latrice Manning, and Mack
allegedly states the following on the video:
. . . he [referring to counsel] said he called Trice [Latrice
Manning]. . . she was like . . what he say? Oh yeah she
picked me up and dropped me off and all and I used the car,
but I was telling him . . . you know, like man I just write
you questions . . . .
[Doc. No. 84-1, p. 2].
the fact that trial is set to begin tomorrow, Wednesday,
November 13, 2019, the Court will tentatively rule on this
issue without briefing from the Government. If the Government
intends to offer this portion of the video, Mack's Motion
to Reconsider is GRANTED. The purported statement has little,
if any probative value, and invokes concerns about the
attorney-client privilege. However, to the extent that the
Government may intend to offer other portions of the video,
the Court will consider arguments on the issue during an
in-Chambers conference prior to the beginning of trial.
Counsel should be present in Chambers by 8:45 a.m. if they
wish to address this or any other issues.
also raises an additional issue with the Court's
Memorandum Order. Mack argues that Federal Rule of Evidence
1008 applies to photographs, as well as recordings and
writings, and, thus, the Court should reconsider that portion
of its ruling related to the best evidence rule. Federal Rule
of Evidence 1002, commonly called the “best evidence
rule, ” provides that “to prove the content of a
writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing,
recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise
provided in these rules or by Act of Congress.” The
“‘original' of a photograph includes the
negative or a print from it.” Fed.R.Evid. 1001.
the original is not required, and other evidence of the
contents of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible
(1) Originals lost or destroyed. All originals are lost or
have been destroyed, unless the proponent lost or destroyed
them in bad faith; or
(2) Original not obtainable. No. original can be obtained by
any available judicial ...