New Federal Guidelines Promote Uniform Treatment of E-Discovery in Criminal Proceedings


The Department of Justice (DOJ), the federal courts, and the criminal defense bar have developed a set of guidelines that appears to be a major step towards uniform treatment of e-discovery in federal criminal investigations and federal criminal trials. For the time being, the new protocol, signed earlier this month, has been introduced to the U.S. Attorney’s Offices, investigative agencies, judges, and various law enforcement divisions as a guideline and a training tool.

The protocol is intended to “promote the efficient and cost-effective post-indictment production of electronically stored information . . . and to reduce unnecessary conflict and litigation over ESI [electronically stored information] discovery . . . .” It will apply only to disclosure of ESI under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16 and 26.2, materials that the government is obligated to produce in litigation, under the caselaw emanating from Brady and Giglio, and the Jencks Act. Though the DOJ specifically excludes application of the protocol to criminal investigations, it will likely give structure to DOJ’s production requests through subpoenas and other investigative mechanisms.  In order to meet ESI obligations at trial, DOJ will, by necessity, have stronger incentives to ensure that investigative materials are produced to DOJ in a format that is “trial ready.”

The 21-page document is based on core e-discovery principles rooted in civil discovery procedures, including the precepts that all lawyers have a responsibility to have an adequate understanding of e-discovery; parties should approach ESI production collaboratively with mutual and interdependent responsibilities; and parties should raise issues and problems with the court early, preferably after good-faith meet and confer sessions. Similar to e-discovery requirements in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and common local court rules, the new protocol recommends that parties agree—from the outset of the case—on production standards, transmissions methods, and security measures; and negotiate, in good faith, to resolve any issues or problems that may arise, and inevitably do arise, between the parties.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Bracewell LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Bracewell LLP on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.