USA v. Bongiovanni, et al.

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 1:19-cr-00227-LJV-MJR Document 349 _ Filed 01/09/23. Page1of2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Vv. 19-CR-227 (JLS) (MJR)

JOSEPH BONGIOVANNI and
PETER GERACE, JR.,

Defendants.

ORDER
The Court again! carefully reviewed the search warrant application signed by
United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Roemer on May 31, 2019, and supporting
affidavit (Case No. 19-M-5154), which the Government submitted to the Court—along
with proposed redactions to the affidavit—for in camera review on December 16, 2022.
See Dkt. 333 (unredacted application); Dkt. 334 (redacted application). On December

22, 2022, the Court conducted an ex parte proceeding with counsel for the Government

+

at which the Court questioned the Government about the proposed redactions,
including the reasons for withholding those portions of the supporting affidavit from
disclosure. See Dkt. 335.

As a result, the Court concludes that:

1. the affidavit in support of the search warrant application in Case No. 19-M-

5154 consists of 109 sequentially-numbered paragraphs;

1 The Court initially reviewed this search warrant application—and others—in camera
in connection with Defendants’ motions to unseal the applications. See Dkt. 208, at 9
(“[T]his Court has conducted its own in camera review of all of the warrant affidavits
and application materials.”).

Case 1:19-cr-00227-LJV-MJR Document 349 _ Filed 01/09/23 Page 2 of 2

2. the Government proposed redactions to part of paragraph 3, paragraphs 7
through 19 in their entirety, and paragraph 107 in its entirety;

3. the information the Government seeks to redact is not information the
Government must disclose under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure;

4. the information the Government seeks to redact does not appear—at this
time—to relate to the expected subject matter of the affiant’s trial testimony,
see 18 U.S.C. § 3500(c); and

5. if the information the Government seeks to redact is later determined to
relate to the subject matter of the affiant’s trial testimony, disclosure of the
redacted information after the witness testifies on direct examination will
not unreasonably delay the trial.

NOW, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court permits these proposed
redactions to the affidavit in support of the search warrant application in Case. No.
19-M-5154; and it is further

ORDERED that the Government shall disclose the redacted search warrant
application and supporting affidavit in Case No. 19-M-5154 (Dkt. 334) pursuant to the

provisions of the protective order signed and entered on January 9, 2023 (Dkt. 347).

afl Ao

JOHN. SINATRA JR~_
UNIZED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: January 9, 2023
Buffalo, New York