January 18, 2021

Via Email: (HammoudF1@michigan.gov)

Fadwa Hammoud, Solicitor General

Office of the Michigan Attorney General
525 West Ottawa Street
Lansing, Michigan 48933

Re: Tomorrow’s Pretrial Conference in People v. Snyder, Case No. 21-00046-SM

Dear Solicitor General Hammoud:

On behalf of our client, former Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, please be advised that we
will be submitting one or two initial pretrial filings before the scheduled pretrial conference at 8:30
AM tomorrow. The first is a formal discovery request, which, among other items, seeks
information from your office about your use of a “taint team” for the “millions of documents and
hundreds of electronic devices” your investigators seized pursuant to search warrants in June 2019.
(See AG Press Release 6.13.19.) The Second is a Motion to Dismiss/Quash the Indictment for
Improper Venue, as the crimes you have alleged against Governor Snyder—a failure to properly
supervise departments and department heads, and a failure to declare a State of Emergency—
allegedly would have occurred in the City of Lansing, not the City of Flint.

Our Discovery Requests

As you know, last year the Michigan Supreme Court expanded a defendant’s right to
discovery in misdemeanor cases. (See MCR 6.201; see also ADM File No. 2018-23.) The new
discovery rule became effective on May 1, 2020. A copy of our Discovery Requests will be served
on your office when filed with the Court.

At your press conference on Thursday, both you and Prosecutor Kym Worthy mentioned
having obtained and reviewed “millions” of documents in the course of your investigation. This
is consistent with the Attorney General’s Press Release of June 13, 2019. That same AG Press
Release referred to an “extraordinary amount of potential evidence not previously examined by
law enforcement” that was obtained by search warrants. Presumably the search warrants referred
to in the AG Press Release include the highly publicized search warrants your office executed on
the other side of AG Dana Nessel’s purported “conflict wall.” As you know, AG Nessel and the
assistant attorneys general on the opposite side of the conflict wall from you were (and still are)
defending the State of Michigan and our client, among other named defendants, in the civil
litigation before the Honorable Judith E. Levy, United States District Court Judge, Eastern District
of Michigan. The other side of the conflict wall was where our client’s documents and electronic

Brian P. Lennon | Partner

D 616.752.2089
E blennon@wnj.com
1500 The Warner Building
150 Ottawa Avenue NW, Floor 15R
Grand Rapids, MI 49503
SG Fadwa Hammoud
January 18, 2021
Page 2

devices were stored after former Governor Snyder left office in January 2019. A section of our
discovery requests is seeking information about your office’s use of a “taint team” to protect the
integrity of your investigation by ensuring that neither you, Prosecutor Worthy, your assistant
prosecutors and investigators, nor Judge Newblatt—the one judge grand juror—had access to our
client’s attorney-client communications or other privileged materials.

Your Office’s Taint Team.

As a preliminary matter, please confirm that your office deployed a taint team. And
assuming the answer to that question is “yes,” please identify by name and title every member of
that taint team and the procedures and protocols in place to ensure that neither you, nor your
investigators and prosecutors had access to attorney-client privileged information seized from the
Attorney General’s Office and elsewhere. The earlier you can provide this information to my firm,
the quicker we can modify our discovery requests.

And if the answer is “no,” you did not use a taint team, then please explain why not?

Lansing – Not Flint – Is the Proper Venue, So the Indictment Must Be Dismissed

Venue, while not an element of the offense in a criminal case, must be proven at trial by
the government beyond a reasonable doubt. “The general venue rule is that defendants should be
tried in the county where the crime was committed.” See People v Houthoofd, 487 Mich 568, 579
(2010) (citations omitted); People v McBurrows, 504 Mich 308, 314 (2019); see also Michigan
Judge’s Benchbook, Section 2.11 & 2.12 (2020). MCL 600.8312(1)-(3) also addresses venue in
criminal matters. All three subsections clearly state that “venue in criminal actions shall be in the
county where the violation took place.” Subsection 4 of the venue statute covers two exceptions,
neither of which applies in this case.

In Count 1 you have alleged that former Governor Snyder “fail[ed] to inquire into the
performance, condition and administration of the public offices and officers that he appointed and
was required to supervise. . . .” Similarly in Count 2, you allege that he “fail[ed] to declare a state
of emergency . . . .” Neither of these allegations of non-feasance (or failure to act) occurred while
the former Governor was in the City of Flint. At all times set forth in the Indictment, our client
was the presiding governor of the State of Michigan with the Executive Office of the Governor
located at the Romney Building in downtown Lansing. Consequently, the proper venue is in the
City of Lansing located in Ingham County—not the City of Flint. As you will see in our Motion
to Dismiss/Quash the Indictment for Improper Venue, the proper remedy is dismissal and not
transfer of the charges to the proper district.

Very truly yours,

Brian P. Lennon
BPL/alr
SG Fadwa Hammoud
January 18, 2021
Page 3

c: Hon. Dana Nessel, Attorney General (miag@michigan.gov)

Hon. Kym Worthy, Wayne County Prosecutor (kworthy@waynecounty.com)
AAG Bryant Patrick Osikowicz (OsikowiczB@michigan.gov)
Charles Ash, Partner, WNJ (cash@wnj.com)
Madelaine C. Lane, Partner, WNJ (mlane@wnj.com)
Judith S. Gracey, Co-counsel (judith@thegraceylawfirm.com)

21230551-1