United States District Court, D. Kansas
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JULIE A. ROBINSON, District Judge.
On March 2, 2015, the Court held a hearing on the following eleven pretrial motions:
(1) Defendants' Joint Motion to Exclude the Government's Proposed Expert Witness (Doc. 53),
(2) Defendant Stegman's Second Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. 54),
(3) Defendant Stegman's Motion to Strike Surplusage (Doc. 55),
(4) Defendant Stegman's Motion for Leave to File Additional Pre-Trial Motions (Doc. 56),
(5) Defendant Stegman's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Related to Money Orders (Doc. 61),
(6) Defendant Stegman's Conditional Motion in Limine to Exclude Bruton Evidence (Doc. 62),
(7) Defendant Stegman's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Relating to the Cleanliness of Midwest Medical Aesthetics Center (Doc. 63),
(8) Defendant Stegman's Motion in Limine to Permit the Defense's Investigator in the Courtroom During Trial (Doc. 64),
(9) Defendant Stegman's Motion for Release of Brady Materials and Motion to Compel the Government to Disclose Renaissance Tax Returns Prepared by Alan Jones (Doc. 65),
(10) Defendant Stegman's Motion for a James Hearing to Determine the Admissibility of Extra Judicial Statements of Alleged Co-Conspirator (Doc. 66), and
(11) Defendant Smith's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of His and His Companies' Supposed Business Practices and Payroll History (Doc. 68). With regard to those motions, the Court finds as follows.
I. Defendants' Joint Motion to Exclude the Government's Proposed Expert Witness (Doc. 53)
Defendants' motion to exclude the Government's expert witness is denied. The Court finds that the Government complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(G) in providing to Defendants the calculations underlying the opinions expressed in the draft revenue agent reports and, in addition, providing through memoranda of interview evidence of the specific transactions the Government will rely on to prove understated income and overstated expenses. The Court, therefore, will not exclude the Government's proposed expert witness.
II. Defendant Stegman's Second Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. 54)
A. Basis for the adjustments set forth in the draft revenue agent reports
Notwithstanding the Court's finding in Section I, the Court grants in part Defendant Stegman's motion to compel discovery relating to the draft revenue agent reports. The Court finds, in light of the substantial number of documents that have been exchanged in this case, that it is appropriate for the Government to provide information beyond that which Rule 16(a)(1)(G) requires. Therefore, by 6:00 p.m. central time on March 3, 2015, the Government shall provide to Defendant Stegman spreadsheets and/or schedules itemizing the transactions that comprise the aggregate totals listed in the draft revenue agent reports. In addition, the Government shall provide the earnings and profits analysis that its expert intends to rely on during trial. In the event the transactions included in the draft revenue agent reports or the Government's earnings and profits analysis change, the Government shall revise the corresponding spreadsheets and/or schedules and shall furnish them to Defendant Stegman within twenty-four hours of their completion. All revisions ...