Preview
Filing # 107581617 E-Filed 05/17/2020 03:34:03 PM
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE NINTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR,
OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA, CRIMINAL
DIVISION
STATE OF FLORIDA, CASE NUMBER: 2019-CF-003738-A-OS
Plaintiff, 2018-CF-003532-A-OS
v.
DIVISION: 101
CHRISTOPHER OTERO-RIVERA,
Defendant.
/
MOTION FOR DISCLOSURE OF IMPEACHING INFORMATION
COMES NOW the defendant, Christopher Otero-Rivera, by and through his undersigned
attorney and moves this Honorable Court to require the State to disclose the following:
1.
The substance of any and all statements of witnesses which are inconsistent with the
witness’s statements to law enforcement;
Any evidence that a State witness is biased against the Defendant;
Any evidence attacking the character of the witness in accordance with the provisions
of section 90.609 (reputation) or 90.610 (conviction of certain crimes), Florida
Statutes; to wit, any and all records and information revealing felony convictions or
convictions involving dishonest or a false statement, regardless of the penalty
attributed to this witness;
Any evidence showing defect of capacity, ability, or opportunity in the witness to
observe, remember, or recount the matters about the State witnesses anticipated trial
testimony.
. Any evidence, including proof by other witnesses, that material facts are inconsistent,
or otherwise contrary to, any evidence the State anticipates presenting at trial;
The substance of any and all statements, agreements, offers or discussions had with
any of the State’s witnesses or a suggestion of lenience, compensation, assurance not
to prosecute, assurance to proceed only on certain causes, or offer of any other benefit
accruing to said individual whatsoever in exchange for their cooperation, assistance
of testimony in the trial herein;7.
10.
Any and all consideration or promises of consideration given to or made on behalf of
government witnesses. By consideration, defendant refers to absolutely anything of
value or use including but not limited to money, immunity grants, witness fees,
special witness fees, transportation assistance, assistance or favorable treatment with
tespect to any criminal; civil, tax court, or administrative dispute with plaintiff, and
anything else which could arguably create an interest or bias in the witness if favor of
the State or against the defense or act as an inducement to testify or to color
testimony;
Any and all prosecutions, investigations or possible prosecutions pending or which
could be brought against the witness and any probationary, parole or deferred
prosecution status of the witness;
Any and all records and information showing prior misconduct or bad acts committed
by the witness;
Moreover, the defendant seeks discovery of any and all impeachment evidence.
Impeachment evidence should be discoverable pursuant to the Due Process Clause of
the United States Constitution, Amendments V and XIV, and the Florida
Constitution, article I, and the withholding of any such evidence constitutes a denial
of the defendant’s constitutionally protected rights to due process, fair trial, cross
examination, and effective assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, their individual clauses
and subparts, and the corresponding provisions of the Florida Constitution. See
Strickler v. Greene, 537 U.S. 263 (1999); Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995)(the
government has the duty to disclose exculpatory evidence even in the absence of a
request); United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985)(Impeaching as well as
exculpatory evidence is favorable to the accused under Brady); Giglio v. United
States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)(withholding of evidence on promise of leniency to
witness is ground for new trial); Giles v. Maryland, 386 U.S. 66 (1967)(evidence
tegarding complaining witness not disclosed violates due process); Brady _v.
Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959); Cardona v.
State, 826 So.2d 968 (Fla. 2002).CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been E-
Filed thru E-file Portal System to the Office of the State Attorney, RWilliams@saoS.org and
JMcManus@sao5.org, on this 16" day of May, 2020.
w sy
fh 4 Le
Ja, Ae x -
MIGDALIA PEREZ
Attorney for Christopher Ortero-Rivera
Florida Bar No.: 696307
517 Bryan Street
Kissimmee, FL 34741
Telephone: 407-530-4920
erez@perezlasurelaw.com
By:
KIMBERLY A. LASURE
Florida Bar No.: 883751
517 Bryan Street
Kissimmee, FL 34741
Telephone: 4 407- 530- 4920
Preview
Filing # 107581617 E-Filed 05/17/2020 03:34:03 PM IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR, OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA, CRIMINAL DIVISION STATE OF FLORIDA, CASE NUMBER: 2019-CF-003738-A-OS Plaintiff, 2018-CF-003532-A-OS v. DIVISION: 101 CHRISTOPHER OTERO-RIVERA, Defendant. / MOTION FOR DISCLOSURE OF IMPEACHING INFORMATION COMES NOW the defendant, Christopher Otero-Rivera, by and through his undersigned attorney and moves this Honorable Court to require the State to disclose the following: 1. The substance of any and all statements of witnesses which are inconsistent with the witness’s statements to law enforcement; Any evidence that a State witness is biased against the Defendant; Any evidence attacking the character of the witness in accordance with the provisions of section 90.609 (reputation) or 90.610 (conviction of certain crimes), Florida Statutes; to wit, any and all records and information revealing felony convictions or convictions involving dishonest or a false statement, regardless of the penalty attributed to this witness; Any evidence showing defect of capacity, ability, or opportunity in the witness to observe, remember, or recount the matters about the State witnesses anticipated trial testimony. . Any evidence, including proof by other witnesses, that material facts are inconsistent, or otherwise contrary to, any evidence the State anticipates presenting at trial; The substance of any and all statements, agreements, offers or discussions had with any of the State’s witnesses or a suggestion of lenience, compensation, assurance not to prosecute, assurance to proceed only on certain causes, or offer of any other benefit accruing to said individual whatsoever in exchange for their cooperation, assistance of testimony in the trial herein;7. 10. Any and all consideration or promises of consideration given to or made on behalf of government witnesses. By consideration, defendant refers to absolutely anything of value or use including but not limited to money, immunity grants, witness fees, special witness fees, transportation assistance, assistance or favorable treatment with tespect to any criminal; civil, tax court, or administrative dispute with plaintiff, and anything else which could arguably create an interest or bias in the witness if favor of the State or against the defense or act as an inducement to testify or to color testimony; Any and all prosecutions, investigations or possible prosecutions pending or which could be brought against the witness and any probationary, parole or deferred prosecution status of the witness; Any and all records and information showing prior misconduct or bad acts committed by the witness; Moreover, the defendant seeks discovery of any and all impeachment evidence. Impeachment evidence should be discoverable pursuant to the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, Amendments V and XIV, and the Florida Constitution, article I, and the withholding of any such evidence constitutes a denial of the defendant’s constitutionally protected rights to due process, fair trial, cross examination, and effective assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, their individual clauses and subparts, and the corresponding provisions of the Florida Constitution. See Strickler v. Greene, 537 U.S. 263 (1999); Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995)(the government has the duty to disclose exculpatory evidence even in the absence of a request); United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985)(Impeaching as well as exculpatory evidence is favorable to the accused under Brady); Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)(withholding of evidence on promise of leniency to witness is ground for new trial); Giles v. Maryland, 386 U.S. 66 (1967)(evidence tegarding complaining witness not disclosed violates due process); Brady _v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959); Cardona v. State, 826 So.2d 968 (Fla. 2002).CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been E- Filed thru E-file Portal System to the Office of the State Attorney, RWilliams@saoS.org and JMcManus@sao5.org, on this 16" day of May, 2020. w sy fh 4 Le Ja, Ae x - MIGDALIA PEREZ Attorney for Christopher Ortero-Rivera Florida Bar No.: 696307 517 Bryan Street Kissimmee, FL 34741 Telephone: 407-530-4920 erez@perezlasurelaw.com By: KIMBERLY A. LASURE Florida Bar No.: 883751 517 Bryan Street Kissimmee, FL 34741 Telephone: 4 407- 530- 4920