United States v. Suazo, 2:18-CR-26-DBH-02. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Maine
Number: infdco20200108981
Visitors: 28
Filed: Jan. 07, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 07, 2020
Summary: PROCEDURAL ORDER D. BROCK HORNBY , District Judge . The Clerk shall schedule a hearing before me on the defendant's motion for release. But first, I direct the government to respond by January 10, 2020, to the defendant's explicit and implicit argument that his current custody does not comply with the Court's Order of December 17, 2019, that he "shall be confined in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custod
Summary: PROCEDURAL ORDER D. BROCK HORNBY , District Judge . The Clerk shall schedule a hearing before me on the defendant's motion for release. But first, I direct the government to respond by January 10, 2020, to the defendant's explicit and implicit argument that his current custody does not comply with the Court's Order of December 17, 2019, that he "shall be confined in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody..
More
PROCEDURAL ORDER
D. BROCK HORNBY, District Judge.
The Clerk shall schedule a hearing before me on the defendant's motion for release. But first, I direct the government to respond by January 10, 2020, to the defendant's explicit and implicit argument that his current custody does not comply with the Court's Order of December 17, 2019, that he "shall be confined in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal [and h]e shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel," Order of Revocation and Detention at 2 (ECF No. 586); see Def.'s Mot. for Release at ¶¶ 14, 16-19, bearing in mind that this case is going to trial in February and is apparently intensive in documents and/or electronic communications. To the extent the defendant maintains that his current conditions of custody bear upon his request for release, he shall also address by the same date why permitting him to return to Massachusetts (if he is released) is more conducive to meetings with his Maine defense counsel and reviewing documents and communications.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
