U.S. v. SNEED, 1:12-CR-59. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20120604895
Visitors: 11
Filed: May 29, 2012
Latest Update: May 29, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM & ORDER ARRAIGNMENT ON INFORMATION WILLIAM B. MITCHELL CARTER, Magistrate Judge. In accordance with Rule 10 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the arraignment of the defendants JOSEPH AGLOR and TIMOTHY SNEED on the Bill of Information returned by the Grand Jury, was held before the undersigned on May 29, 2012. Those present for the hearing included: (1) AUSA Annie Svolto for the USA. (2) The defendant, JOSEPH AGLOR. (3) Atty. Lee Ortwein for defendant Aglor (4) The def
Summary: MEMORANDUM & ORDER ARRAIGNMENT ON INFORMATION WILLIAM B. MITCHELL CARTER, Magistrate Judge. In accordance with Rule 10 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the arraignment of the defendants JOSEPH AGLOR and TIMOTHY SNEED on the Bill of Information returned by the Grand Jury, was held before the undersigned on May 29, 2012. Those present for the hearing included: (1) AUSA Annie Svolto for the USA. (2) The defendant, JOSEPH AGLOR. (3) Atty. Lee Ortwein for defendant Aglor (4) The defe..
More
MEMORANDUM & ORDER ARRAIGNMENT ON INFORMATION
WILLIAM B. MITCHELL CARTER, Magistrate Judge.
In accordance with Rule 10 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the arraignment of the defendants JOSEPH AGLOR and TIMOTHY SNEED on the Bill of Information returned by the Grand Jury, was held before the undersigned on May 29, 2012.
Those present for the hearing included:
(1) AUSA Annie Svolto for the USA.
(2) The defendant, JOSEPH AGLOR.
(3) Atty. Lee Ortwein for defendant Aglor
(4) The defendant, TIMOTHY SNEED.
(5) Atty. Clay Whittaker for defendant Sneed.
(6) Courtroom Deputy Kelli Jones.
After being sworn in due form of law, the defendants were informed or reminded of their privilege against self-incrimination accorded under the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The individuals present were the defendants named in the Information.
The defendants acknowledged having been provided with a copy of the Information. The defendants both waived a formal reading of the Information and both defendants entered not guilty pleas to each count of the Information.
Presently, this case is assigned the dates set forth in a separate Discovery and Scheduling Order.
Source: Leagle
