U.S. v. WADDELL, CR415-095. (2017)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20170213986
Visitors: 8
Filed: Feb. 10, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 10, 2017
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM T. MOORE, Jr. , District Judge . Before the Court is Defendant Stacy Paul Waddell's Motion for Transcripts of Pre-trial Hearings and Jury Trial. (Doc. 321.) In the motion. Defendant requests transcripts of five different hearings, covering a number of simple issues such as arraignment and pre-trial conferences, and the entire five-day trial. ( Id. at 1.) The only issue relevant to the upcoming hearing, however, is Defendant's sentencing. After reviewing Defendant's request a
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM T. MOORE, Jr. , District Judge . Before the Court is Defendant Stacy Paul Waddell's Motion for Transcripts of Pre-trial Hearings and Jury Trial. (Doc. 321.) In the motion. Defendant requests transcripts of five different hearings, covering a number of simple issues such as arraignment and pre-trial conferences, and the entire five-day trial. ( Id. at 1.) The only issue relevant to the upcoming hearing, however, is Defendant's sentencing. After reviewing Defendant's request an..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM T. MOORE, Jr., District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendant Stacy Paul Waddell's Motion for Transcripts of Pre-trial Hearings and Jury Trial. (Doc. 321.) In the motion. Defendant requests transcripts of five different hearings, covering a number of simple issues such as arraignment and pre-trial conferences, and the entire five-day trial. (Id. at 1.) The only issue relevant to the upcoming hearing, however, is Defendant's sentencing. After reviewing Defendant's request and the record in this case, the Court fails to find any need for these transcripts prior to sentencing. Indeed, Defendant possesses firsthand knowledge of these proceedings because was physically present for each one and represented himself at trial. Defendant received a copy of his Presentence Investigation Report, which he thoroughly reviewed and filed numerous objections. Defendant's requests are just not relevant to any issues that may arise at his upcoming sentencing.1 Accordingly, Defendant's motion is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The Court is aware that Defendant has now submitted the appropriate documentation to request a transcript of his jury trial. Therefore, the Court will withhold ruling on Defendant's pending Motion for Judgment of Acquittal and Motion for New Trial until he has had a reasonable opportunity to review the transcript and provide any desired amendment to these motions.
Source: Leagle
