UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal Action No. 20-40 (BAH) JESSICA JOHANNA OSEGUERA GONZALEZ, Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Having already resolved twelve of defendant Jessica Johanna Oseguera Gonzalez’s pretrial motions, see United States v. Oseguera Gonzalez, Crim. Action No. 20-40 (BAH), 2020 WL 6158246 (D.D.C. Oct. 21, 2020) and United States v. Oseguera Gonzalez, Crim. Action No. 20-40 (BAH), 2020 WL 6342948 (D.D.C. Oct. 29, 2020), this memorandum opinion resolves the government’s four pretrial motions, defendant’s six pending motions to compel, and defendant’s pending motion to dismiss the Superseding Indictment. 1 Specifically, the government seeks to preclude defendant from suggesting at trial, through argument or testimony, (1) that the government must show defendant was given actual contemporaneous notice that each of the five entities with which she is charged with engaging in unlawful transactions had been designated as a Specially Designated Narcotics Trafficker by the 1 One additional defense motion, Def.’s Mot. in Limine for Early Disclosure of Jencks Material and Timely Disclosure of Giglio/Brady Materials and Incorporated Mem. of Points and Auths., ECF No. 133, remains pending and will not be addressed in this memorandum opinion. In two prior opinions, the following eleven defense motions were denied: Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment for Lack of Venue, Based on Violations of Defendant’s Due Process Rights, for Vagueness, and for Lack of Specificity, ECF Nos. 66, 67, 74, 76, respectively; Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss Counts One through Five of the Superseding Indictment as Duplicitous, and to Strike Surplusage, ECF Nos. 68, 75; Defendant’s Motion for a Bill of Particulars, ECF No. 69; Defendant’s Motion for Notice by the Government Pursuant to Rule 12 of Intention to Use Specific Evidence Arguably Subject to Suppression, ECF No. 70; Defendant’s Motion to Preserve Notes, Memoranda, and/or Reports, ECF No. 71; and Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Additional Pretrial Motions, ECF. No. 73. A twelfth defense motion, Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Witness Prior to and During the Trial of this Case and to Disclose All Instances Where Witnesses Were Interviewed Jointly, ECF No. 72, was granted in part and denied in part. 1 U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”), Gov’t’s Omnibus Set of Pretrial Mots. (“Gov’t’s Omnibus Mots.”) at 18–21, ECF No. 63; and (2) that the underlying OFAC designations are invalid, id. at 22–23. In addition, the government moves to admit at trial as “other crimes” evidence (3) defendant’s association with a Mexico-based business not named in the Superseding Indictment that OFAC also designated as a Specially Designated Narcotics Trafficker, Gov’t’s Omnibus Mots. at 5–18; and (4) defendant’s activity in keeping ledgers of the proceeds and expenses of certain narcotics trafficking activities for the drug trafficking organization (“DTO”) based in Jalisco, Mexico, known as the Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion (“CJNG”), of which her father, Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes (“Mencho”) is the leader, Gov’t’s Mot. to Admit Other Crimes Evidence at Trial (“Gov’t’s 404(b) Mot.”) ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals