U.S. v. HARRIS, 2:04-cr-00118-PMP-PAL. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20141113f88
Visitors: 10
Filed: Nov. 12, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 12, 2014
Summary: ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Before the Court for consideration is Defendant's Motion to Bring to Trial or in the Alternative Dismissal of All Holds (Doc. #30) filed September 26, 2014. For the reasons set forth in the Government's Response (Doc. #32) the Court finds that Defendant's motion must be denied. Specifically, as noted in the Government's response, Defendant Harris pled guilty to the Indictment on this case on October 13, 2004. On January 7, 2005, Defendant Harris was sente
Summary: ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Before the Court for consideration is Defendant's Motion to Bring to Trial or in the Alternative Dismissal of All Holds (Doc. #30) filed September 26, 2014. For the reasons set forth in the Government's Response (Doc. #32) the Court finds that Defendant's motion must be denied. Specifically, as noted in the Government's response, Defendant Harris pled guilty to the Indictment on this case on October 13, 2004. On January 7, 2005, Defendant Harris was senten..
More
ORDER
PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge.
Before the Court for consideration is Defendant's Motion to Bring to Trial or in the Alternative Dismissal of All Holds (Doc. #30) filed September 26, 2014. For the reasons set forth in the Government's Response (Doc. #32) the Court finds that Defendant's motion must be denied.
Specifically, as noted in the Government's response, Defendant Harris pled guilty to the Indictment on this case on October 13, 2004. On January 7, 2005, Defendant Harris was sentenced to a term of 77 months imprisonment, "concurrent with the unexpired sentenced the Defendant is currently serving in Nevada Case No. C181588." Thus, Harris' federal conviction became final more than nine years ago. No basis is demonstrated by Harris to warrant the relief requested in the form of a new trial.
Similarly, Defendant Harris' motion to release the "federal hold" is without merit. That procedure merely ensures that when Defendant Harris completes service of the concurrent State sentence, federal authorities will be notified to enable them to commence the process of supervised release mandated by the sentence imposed in this case.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Gregory Harris' Motion to Bring to Trial or in the Alternative Dismissal of All Holds (Doc. #30) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
