Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

USA v. Silk, 1:13-cr-053 (2018)

Court: District Court, D. North Dakota Number: infdco20180202e99 Visitors: 8
Filed: Feb. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 01, 2018
Summary: ORDER CHARLES S. MILLER, JR. , Magistrate Judge . The Indictment returned by the Grand Jury on March 26, 2013, contained a scrivener's error, to wit: it erroneously identified defendant as Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. rather than Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. At defendant's initial appearance on April 18, 2013, the parties noted this scrivener's error, acknowledged that the charges set forth in the Indictment were against Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. and agreed to proceed accordingly. Thereafter, the suffix "
More

ORDER

The Indictment returned by the Grand Jury on March 26, 2013, contained a scrivener's error, to wit: it erroneously identified defendant as Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. rather than Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. At defendant's initial appearance on April 18, 2013, the parties noted this scrivener's error, acknowledged that the charges set forth in the Indictment were against Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. and agreed to proceed accordingly. Thereafter, the suffix "Jr." was dropped from the case caption and defendant was identified as either Samuel Bryce Silk or Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr.1 However, the suffix "Jr." was not similarly dropped from the docket sheet. This has created some confusion from an administrative standpoint as there is another, different defendant by the name of Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. who has had a case pending before this court.

To avoid the potential for any further confusion, the case caption and docket sheet in the above-entitled action shall be amended to reflect that Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. is the named defendant. The Clerk's office need not go back and edit all of the docket text to reflect this amendment. Likewise, the parties need not go back and amend anything they have filed with the court to date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. For example, defendant signed the plea agreement as Samuel B. Silk, Sr., see Doc. No. 22, and the Judgment of Conviction identified defendant as Samuel B. Silk, see Doc. No 23.
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