Free Motion to Take Deposition - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cr-01455-BEN

Document 24-3

Filed 05/18/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

NED LYNCH--CA ST. BAR NO. 149680 Attorney At Law 110 West C Street, Suite 1407 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619-525-0081 Attorney for the Material Witness

United States District Court Southern District of California (Hon. Nita L. Stormes) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ARA E. AVETYANTS, ASHOT BARSEGIAN,) and ARSEN GRISHAI MOTIVOSYAN, ) ) Defendant(s). ) ) Criminal Case No. 08CR1455BEN(NLS) Declaration Of Attorney Ned Lynch In Support Of The Material Witness' Motions For Videotape Deposition And For His Release From Custody Date: June 12, 2008 Time: 9:30 a.m. Judge: Nita L. Storme Room: F

I, Ned Lynch, declare: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and before the United

States District Court for the Southern District of California. 2. On April 29, 2008 I was appointed to represent material witness Ara Hakobyan [the

"Material Witness"] in this case. As a material witness attorney one of my primary responsibilities is to help arrange for the release of the material witness from custody as soon as possible. The Material Witness is being held in custody by the U.S. Marshal, with an additional detention hold on him by U.S. immigration authorities. To that end, I promptly conducted an interview with the Material Witness to explain why he was being held and under what conditions he could be released. In most alien smuggling cases such as this one the material witness is released by having a personal surety post a court-approved appearance bond of $5,000, and for the surety or family of the witness to also satisfy any other release conditions that are imposed by

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:08-cr-01455-BEN

Document 24-3

Filed 05/18/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

U.S. immigration authorities. 3. The court set the bond amount at $30,000 for the Material Witness, and the Department of

Homeland Security will not permit the Material Witness to be released from its custody even if the court bond is posted. Therefore, the Material Witness is essentially being held in custody without bail, and he will continue to be held indefinitely unless his videotaped deposition is taken and he is released from custody to be permitted to return to his home country. By the time this motion will be heard the Material Witness will be in custody nearly 7 weeks (since April 26, 2008). 4. The Material Witness informed me his detention is imposing an emotional, mental, and

economic hardship on him and his family. He has not been charged with any crime relating to this case. He has a wife and two minor children that rely on him for support. His wife and children are living as refugees in another country, not their homeland. The Material Witness has made a claim for asylum in the U.S., and the longer he stays in custody as a material witness, the longer he is unable to resolve his asylum claim and provide for his family as refugees in a foreign land. Thus, the lengthy and indefinite nature of the Material Witness' detention is causing him and his family a lot of stress, anxiety, worry, and economic hardship. 5. I am not aware of any reason in this case why the testimony of the Material Witness cannot

be secured adequately by a videotaped deposition, nor am I aware of any reason why he should not be released from this case once the deposition is concluded. 6. The Material Witness is willing to testify about the facts he knows relating to this case if he

is granted immunity from prosecution, and perhaps even if he is not. There are only a few facts relevant to this case which the witness is competent to testify about--facts that are material and not cumulative to the proposed testimony of the other witnesses in this case. Specifically, the witness can testify about: (a) his citizenship, (b) who might have transported the witness, and (c) whether the witness agreed to pay anyone. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Dated: May 18, 2008

s/Ned Lynch Ned Lynch, Attorney for the Material Witness

E-mail: [email protected]

U.S. v. Ara E. Avetyants, et al., Case No. 08CR1455BEN Declaration of Attorney Ned Lynch Supporting a Mat Wit Videotaped Deposition

Page 2 of 2