[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ochoa 32
I'll have to get back to you. I may be.
Haytham Faraj
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 27, 2010, at 12:00 PM, "Fitz Maj Danielle N" <danielle.fitz@usmc.mil> wrote:
> Mr. Faraj and Maj Marshall,
>
> Are you available on 30 Nov to conduct this Art 32?
>
> Thanks,
> Maj Fitz
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 7:56
> To: Haytham Faraj; Fitz Maj Danielle N; Marshall Maj Meridith L
> Cc: Douvas Capt Alex G
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Maj Fitz:
>
> Both civilian counsel and detailed counsel are scheduled for trial (U.S. v. Wutterich) starting next week--so the continuance requests a date for which both counsel are currently not available. The fact that the trial *might* be continued is of no consequence. Granted, TC's are generally fungible, but it is not reasonable to request constantly shifting dates. As you know, there are a lot of moving parts involved with an Article 32, primarily witness coordination, so I need a date certain, not a date that may or may not open up for the defense. The facts are that 1) the defense is not ready to proceed today and 2) both DC's are in trial at Pendleton next week. Therefore, any delay from today until after that trial is scheduled for completion should not be counted against the government for speedy trial purposes.
>
> Bottom line: request that you set 30 Nov as the new Art 32 date (Wutterich should be done by then), and grant excludable delay to be charged against the defense for every day between 27 Oct and 30 Nov.
>
> S/F
>
> Maj Hatch
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:14 PM
> To: Fitz Maj Danielle N; Marshall Maj Meridith L; Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: hatch.doug@gmail.com; Douvas Capt Alex G
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Maj Fitz,
> I'm available tomorrow most of the day. Our request countenanced that the
> date I become available may not be convenient for the Government. We
> provided that date as my first available. I am scheduled for a month long
> trial to begin next week that may get stayed by a last minute interlocutory
> appeal. If it gets stayed, I will be available most of the week to do the
> 32. If doesn't get stayed, I will not become available again until the end
> of the month.
>
> Vr,
> Haytham Faraj
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fitz Maj Danielle N [mailto:danielle.fitz@usmc.mil]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 7:57 PM
> To: Marshall Maj Meridith L; Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: haytham@puckettfaraj.com; hatch.doug@gmail.com; Douvas Capt Alex G
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> All,
>
> I think we all or you all need to have a conference call and come up with a
> mutually agreed upon date. We were all set to start the Art 32 on 27 Oct,
> the date previously agreed upon by all parties. The date from the
> continuance that we all agree upon in the future will be defense delay. I'm
> not going to pick a date where trial counsel is not available.
>
> R/
> Maj Fitz
>
>
> Danielle Fitz
> Major, USMCR
> Head, Civil Law
> Office of the Staff Judge Advocate
> MCB Camp Pendleton
> 760.725.6094
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marshall Maj Meridith L
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 16:28
> To: Fitz Maj Danielle N; Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: 'haytham@puckettfaraj.com'; 'hatch.doug@gmail.com'; Douvas Capt Alex G
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Maj Fitz,
>
> It is the defense position that TCs are fungible.
>
> R/
>
> Major Meridith L. Marshall
> Senior Defense Counsel
> MCAS, Miramar
> 858-577-1720
> meridith.marshall@usmc.mil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fitz Maj Danielle N
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:28 PM
> To: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L; 'haytham@puckettfaraj.com';
> 'hatch.doug@gmail.com'; Douvas Capt Alex G
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Can defense come up with another date where trial counsel is not TAD? When
> is trial counsel available?
>
> Danielle Fitz
> Major, USMCR
> Head, Civil Law
> Office of the Staff Judge Advocate
> MCB Camp Pendleton
> 760.725.6094
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 15:50
> To: Fitz Maj Danielle N
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L; 'haytham@puckettfaraj.com';
> hatch.doug@gmail.com; Douvas Capt Alex G
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Maj Fitz,
>
> The government has to oppose the attached continuance motion; as I stated to
> Mr. Faraj on the phone a few minutes ago, I detailed myself to this case and
> I will be TAD on 3 Nov. If you grant the defense continuance request, I CAN
> detail Capt Douvas to represent the government for the purposes of the 32 on
> 3 Nov. The government's position is that the defense should eat any and all
> time after 27 Oct.
>
> I have a meeting I need to run to right now at MCRD. The 11th-hour nature
> of the defense request makes it difficult to respond with much more
> explanation, but am happy to try a conference call tomorrow.
>
> I'll have access to my gmail account the rest of this evening--I have cc-ed
> that account to this email.
>
> Maj Hatch
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fitz Maj Danielle N
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 1:38 PM
> To: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L; 'haytham@puckettfaraj.com'
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Sounds good. I'll just stand by. I was given the authority to grant
> continuances so please submit it to me via trial counsel.
>
> R/
>
> Danielle Fitz
> Major, USMCR
> Head, Civil Law
> Office of the Staff Judge Advocate
> MCB Camp Pendleton
> 760.725.6094
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 13:32
> To: Fitz Maj Danielle N
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L; haytham@puckettfaraj.com
> Subject: FW: Ochoa 32
>
> Maj Fitz,
>
> Meant to email you last night, and we had another Art 32 from this morning.
>
>
> In the Ochoa case, the defense told me via email below they will be
> submitting a continuance, though I have not seen it yet. The government
> generally will not object to a continuance, granted the defense agrees to
> excludable delay, and we can all work out the dates.
>
> S/f
>
> Maj Hatch
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 8:54 PM
> To: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Absolutely no objection. We will submit our formal request tomorrow.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hatch MAJ Douglas C [mailto:douglas.hatch@usmc.mil]
> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 8:08 PM
> To: Haytham
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L
> Subject: RE: Ochoa 32
>
> Any objection to me giving Maj Fitz a heads up via email, so that she can
> plan accordingly?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haytham [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 1:48 PM
> To: Hatch MAJ Douglas C
> Cc: Marshall Maj Meridith L
> Subject: Re: Ochoa 32
>
> We will submit a continuance.
>
> Haytham Faraj
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 25, 2010, at 4:24 PM, "Hatch MAJ Douglas C" <douglas.hatch@usmc.mil>
> wrote:
>
>> Are you all going to submit a continuance? I would like to know out
>> of
> courtesy to the IO, who will be travelling from North County to conduct this
> hearing, if we are still going this Wednesday.
>>
>