Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 783
摘要
Defense Motion · For Review and Disclosure of CIPA Classified Material for Sentencing
A six-page letter motion dated January 5, 2026 from Joshua L. Dratel of Dratel & Lewis to Judge Analisa Torres. It asks the Court to review the classified material the government provided to the Court in 2023 pursuant to Section 4 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d) (the "Section 4 material"; see Dkts. 210 and 252), and to compel disclosure to cleared defense counsel of those items material or helpful to Mr. Guo.
Why the request is renewed
The Court had already issued a ruling, and disclosed certain materials, in an order of May 29, 2024 (Dkt. 363). The defense notes that decision was rendered in the context of relevance to and admissibility at trial, whereas the present motion seeks material and information in relation to sentencing, which has a far broader conception of relevance and to which the Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply.
Two legal propositions
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) applies fully at sentencing. The defense notes that Brady was itself a sentencing case, and that the rule it states is that suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good or bad faith of the prosecution. It also cites Fed. R. Crim. P. 5(f) (see Dkt. 9).
- Under CIPA the standard is more relaxed than Brady. The defense argues that information need not be "material" to the defense for disclosure to be required; the question is whether it is "helpful or material" to the defense, and to be helpful or material the evidence need not rise to the level Brady would require.
One procedural request
Consistent with traditional practice, counsel also request an opportunity to present to the Court ex parte a "roadmap" of what materials and information counsel has a good-faith belief exists within the Section 4 material.
Where it sits on the docket
The CIPA thread runs from July 2023: the defense requested an ex parte conference under CIPA (Dkt. 111) → the Government made classified ex parte Section 4 submissions on December 22, 2023 and again in March 2024 (Dkts. 210, 252) → the Court ruled and disclosed in part on May 29, 2024 (Dkt. 363) → this motion (Dkt. 783). The defense separately filed a sealed Brady motion on February 24, 2026; in denying the motion to adjourn sentencing on June 25, 2026 the Court stated that it had already ruled on that motion and that it provided no basis to delay sentencing (Dkt. 855).