[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Defense continuance request ICO U.S. v. Bell



All,

Doesn't Mr. Faraj's request state that all delay in connection with his reqeust is excludable?   I am at Pendleton and don't have it in front of me.

Maj Marshall

Major Meridith L. Marshall
Senior Defense Counsel
Miramar Phone Number:  858-577-1720
Camp Pendleton Office:  760-725-3952


-----Original Message-----
From: Keske Maj Zenon W 
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 13:06
To: Hatch MAJ Douglas C; Marshall Maj Meridith L
Cc: Douvas Capt Alex G
Subject: RE: Defense continuance request ICO U.S. v. Bell

All,
Maj Marshall's delay request stating that Mr. Faraj has been retained and the enclosure of Mr. Faraj's continuance request are sufficient in my mind to assume that Mr. Faraj has been retained as civilian defense counsel.

I tend to agree with the government though, that it will be cleaner if the defense request for delay contains specific dates. If there were a speedy trial issue, the delay request as it stands creates a potential accounting nightmare. My recommendation is that the defense delay request specifically state that it is requesting excludable delay for speedy trial purposes (RCM 707 and Art 10) from X date to X date in order to have their client properly evaluated under RCM 706. 
As that date draws near, if the 706 hasn't been completed, or counsel aren't available on that date to conduct the Article 32, defense can request an additional continuance in the same manner. If I don't get a new request by COB Monday the 4th, I will give you my decision based on the current request.
r/s
Maj Keske


-----Original Message-----
From: Hatch MAJ Douglas C 
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 11:58
To: Marshall Maj Meridith L; Keske Maj Zenon W
Cc: Douvas Capt Alex G
Subject: RE: Defense continuance request ICO U.S. v. Bell

The government's major concern is the defense's unwillingness to eat the time for excludable delay purposes.  I think the defense may reasonably ask for a continuance while awaiting the CO's decision to direct a 706 board, but it's not reasonable to expect the government to eat that time.

We need a date certain so that we can accurately count up days if any continuance is granted, so that we know which days are government time and which are defense time.


-----Original Message-----
From: Marshall Maj Meridith L 
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 11:35 AM
To: Keske Maj Zenon W
Cc: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
Subject: RE: Defense continuance request ICO U.S. v. Bell

Maj Keske,

Originally, I was informed by TC that Haytham Faraj's continuance request was unacceptable because he has not entered an appearance.  I am confused by this because there is no requirement for a civilian defense counsel to enter an appearance at this stage.  Further, at the 32, the Marine has the right to a civilian defense counsel, as you will no doubt inform him when you go through the gouge.  I did, however, decide to add my own cover letter adopting Haytham Faraj's continuance request.  He is lead counsel, not me.

I was later informed that it is unacceptable because it doesn't give a date certain.  I was unaware of a requirement for a continuance request for a 32 to give a "date certain."  Mr. Faraj and myself both believe that a 706 board is necessary in this case, and again, it is a question you will ask us when you go through the gouge.   It is our duty to address it prior.  

Major Marshall

Major Meridith L. Marshall
Senior Defense Counsel
Miramar Phone Number:  858-577-1720
Camp Pendleton Office:  760-725-3952

-----Original Message-----
From: Hatch MAJ Douglas C 
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 9:26
To: Keske Maj Zenon W
Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L
Subject: Defense continuance request ICO U.S. v. Bell

Maj Keske,

Please find attached the original continuance request and government endorsement, recommending denial of the request in its current form.

S/F

Maj Hatch

-----Original Message-----
From: Marshall Maj Meridith L 
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 2:41 PM
To: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
Cc: haytham@puckettfaraj.com
Subject: 

Doug,

Please find attached re:  GySgt Bell.

R/


Major Meridith L. Marshall
Senior Defense Counsel
MCAS, Miramar
858-577-1720
meridith.marshall@usmc.mil 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature