United States v. Zabavsky

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) V. ) Criminal No. 21-0598 (PLF) ) TERENCE SUTTON ) and ) ANDREW ZABAVSKY, ) ) Defendants. ) _ ) ORDER For the reasons and constraints set forth in the accompanying Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that the government’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Inadmissible Expert Testimony [Dkt. No. 219] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; it is FURTHER ORDERED that John J. Brennan’s testimony is admitted in part and excluded in part; Bruce-Alan Barnard’s testimony is excluded in full; Michael A. Wear’s testimony is admitted in part and excluded in part; and James K. Dahlquist’s testimony is excluded in full; it is FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Andrew Zabavsky’s Daubert Motion to Preclude Expert Testimony [Dkt. No. 220] is DENIED IN FULL; it is FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Terence Sutton’s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony [Dkt. No. 221] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; it is FURTHER ORDERED that Robert Drago’s testimony (as proffered and narrowed in scope on November 1, 2022) is admitted in full; Carolyn Totaro’s testimony is admitted in part and excluded in part; and Mark Hammond’s testimony is admitted in full; it is FURTHER ORDERED that the government’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Defendant Sutton’s Crash Reconstruction Opinion Testimony [Dkt. No. 293] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; and it is FURTHER ORDERED Thomas Langley’s testimony is admitted in part and excluded in part. SO ORDERED. PAUL L. FRIEDMAN United States District Judge DATE: iv fre laa