Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 334

摘要

Government Letter Motion · Preclude "Presence of Counsel" Defense

This six-page letter motion, dated May 13, 2024 from AUSA Ryan B. Finkel, responds to the defense's May 10, 2024 letter (Dkt. 333, case-doc-333) regarding the advice-of-counsel defense and asks the Court to preclude any "presence of counsel" defense in United States v. Guo, S3 23 Cr. 118 (AT). Exhibit A (case-doc-334-1) is attached.

Government's Position

The government argues that the defendant should be precluded from advancing arguments or evidence about a "presence of counsel" defense, because:

• The defense has expressly disclaimed any advice-of-counsel defense (Dkt. 333);
• However, the defense reserves the right to present evidence about Mr. Guo's awareness that legal counsel was involved in certain transactions;
• The government argues that the mere "presence of counsel" at transactions is irrelevant to the elements of the charged offenses and would mislead the jury;
• Such an argument would invite jurors to draw improper inferences about the defendant's mental state that are not supported by the actual scope of counsel's advice;
• Under FRE 401 and 403, evidence of counsel's mere presence — without a full advice-of-counsel defense — should be excluded.

Procedural Background

In December 2023, the government had identified the presence-of-counsel issue as a potential defense theme; the dispute now crystallizes around what the defense intends to do at trial after disclaiming the formal advice-of-counsel defense.