Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Trimmer

United States District Court, D. Nevada

March 28, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD LEE TRIMMER, Defendant.

          STEVEN W. MYHRE Acting United States Attorney PATRICK BURNS Assistant United States Attorney Nevada State Bar #: 11779 Attorneys for the United States of America.

          GOVERNMENT'S EMERGENCY MOTION TO EXTEND FILING DEADLINES TWO WEEKS

          RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         COMES NOW the United State of America, by and through STEVEN W. MYHRE, Acting United States Attorney, and PATRICK BURNS, Assistant United States Attorney, and hereby respectfully submits this Emergency Motion to Extend Filing Deadlines Two Weeks.

         I. Factual and Procedural Background

         The Court set a briefing schedule that required Defendant Richard Trimmer's (Trimmer) attorneys to submit to the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), on March 24, 2017, a proposed plan for Trimmer's conditional release. The Bureau of Prisons was ordered to evaluate Trimmer's proposal and, on March 31, 2017, submit to Trimmer's attorneys a written response to the proposal addressing several questions enumerated by the Court. The Court ordered Trimmer's proposed plan to be filed on April 4, 2017, with a response/objection from the Government, and a hearing occurring on April 11 and 18, 2017, respectively. Because the BOP personnel involved in Trimmer's care require additional time to meaningfully evaluate Trimmer's proposed release plan, the Government now files this emergency motion to extend the deadlines and hearing date in this case by two weeks.

         II. Argument

         Good Cause and the Need for a Meaningful Review of Trimmer's Proposed Release Plan Justifies Permitting BOP Two Additional Weeks to Evaluate the Plan and Formulate a Recommendation as to Its Viability

         On March 24, 2017, the undersigned counsel was made aware by BOP that its Risk Panel physicians and other staff require additional time in order to conduct a meaningful evaluation of Trimmer's proposed plan for his conditional release. This request appears to be imminently reasonable and made for the good faith purpose of conducting a meaningful evaluation of the plan. Thus, the Government requests the Court to permit such additional time and extend the deadlines and hearing date in this matter two weeks.

         Good cause supports this request. First, no BOP personnel were ordered to be present at the time the Court's briefing schedule was established. Thus, the original deadline was arrived at without the involved personnel's input as to how much time would be required to address Trimmer's plan. On March 24, 2017, the undersigned and Trimmer's counsel were advised that the head of the Risk Panel, Dr. Jason E. Gabel, Ph.D., LP, the chief psychologist at FMC Rochester, was concerned that the March 31, 2017 deadline is problematically short in terms of permitting the required risk assessment panel review of Trimmer's proposal. Additionally, BOP counsel indicates that Dr. Gabel is a key testifying witness in a contested 4246 hearing, and will testify on Thursday, March 30, 2017, with pre-hearing meetings regarding the case on Monday, March 27, 2017, and Wednesday, March 29, 2017.[1] Moreover, BOP counsel appears to have concerns that the short deadline might conflict with the maternity leave of an employee involved in the evaluation process.

         Equally important, BOP requires time to research (and in some cases contact) the various service providers included in Trimmer's proposed plan, and such contacts are essential to a meaningful review of the plan. Moreover, the BOP social worker indicates that Probation must be consulted about the proposed plan. Funding issues regarding the half-way house placement need to be addressed for the plan to be viable. And the availability of a such a placement in a halfway house-such placements are at a premium and can take well over a month to open-needs to be investigated. Finally, according to BOP counsel, it appears that Trimmer was recently released from an inpatient stay at the Mayo Clinic where he was the subject of multiple exploratory lung surgeries and nearly passed away during a nineteen-day hospitalization during the period February 10-28, 2017, and an earlier six-day, February 3-8, 2017, hospitalization. BOP asked the undersigned to seek out an additional two weeks to evaluate Trimmer's proposed release plan, with BOP's response being due on April 14, 2017 if the Court sees fit.

         Given this clear good cause for permitting BOP a mere two additional weeks, the undersigned requested Trimmer's counsel to stipulate to presenting a proposed order to the Court, which would extend the current deadlines two weeks. Trimmer's counsel rejected such a stipulation, indicating that it was Trimmer himself who must agree to the stipulation. Apparently Trimmer was consulted and he does not agree to permit BOP the additional time to investigate the proposed release plan. Thus, the Government is relegated to presenting the Court with this motion on an emergency basis requesting that the Court see fit to permit BOP an additional two weeks in order to provide a meaningful evaluation of the proposed plan, and adjustment of the other deadlines and hearing date.

         III. Conclusion

         WHEREFORE, after consideration of the included facts, points, authorities, and arguments, the Government respectfully ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.