Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Antonucci, 2:14-cr-099-GEB. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20161011791 Visitors: 10
Filed: Oct. 07, 2016
Latest Update: Oct. 07, 2016
Summary: STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF RELEASE ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . Ms. Taggart was released from custody a couple of days following her arrest on April 4, 2014. She was released under pretrial supervision. She successfully completed her inpatient drug treatment program, MRT and Better Choices. She has been living in the community for many months under pretrial supervision and has maintained employment. Ms. Taggart has complied with the conditions of her release and there
More

STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF RELEASE

Ms. Taggart was released from custody a couple of days following her arrest on April 4, 2014. She was released under pretrial supervision. She successfully completed her inpatient drug treatment program, MRT and Better Choices. She has been living in the community for many months under pretrial supervision and has maintained employment. Ms. Taggart has complied with the conditions of her release and there have been no petitions filed.

Ms. Taggart is anticipating a move to Chester, New York, with the approval of pretrial services. She has a place to live and steady employment arranged there. Here in Sacramento her income has not been sufficient to pay her bills each month and she has had a constant struggle to make ends meet. She does not enjoy a support network here like she would have in Chester. Pretrial has been fully informed and will approve the change of address if this stipulation is approved. The parties are requesting that condition 4, which prohibits contact with her co-defendant, Ms. Antonucci, be removed. The reason for this request is that Ms. Taggart will be working with a relative of Ms. Antonucci's and living close by. It is inevitable that they will have contact if she is permitted to make this move. (Ms. Antonucci is already living back east with her husband.)

Ms. Taggart has already completed her presentence interview with the probation officer assigned to her case and she will be able to get herself back to this district for sentencing.

The parties feel that a no contact order is no longer needed as a condition of pretrial release for either defendant. Both defendants have already pled, and contact has previously been allowed when Ms. Antonucci was undergoing medical treatment.

The parties respectfully requests that the conditions of pretrial supervision be modified for both defendants to exclude the condition (#4) containing the no contact order. All other conditions are to remain in full force and effect.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that conditions of supervision for both defendants be modified to exclude the condition (#4) containing the no contact order. All other conditions are to remain in full force and effect.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer