Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cr-03110-WMC

Document 12-2

Filed 11/26/2007

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

AL SMITHSON, Esq. 830 23rd Street San Diego, California 92102 (619) 234-8729 Attorney State Bar No. 51611 Attorney for Material Witness: JOSE FILOMMENO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Honorable BARBARA L. MAJOR) ) CRIMINAL CASE 07CR3110-JM ) MAGISTRATE CASE 07MJ8857-PCL ) DATE: December 13, 2007 ) TIME: 10:30 A.M. Plaintiff, ) ) DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY v. ) AL SMITHSON IN SUPPORT ) OF MOTION FOR ORDER JOSE ALFONSO TORRES, ) SETTING VIDEO DEPOSITION ) OF MATERIAL WITNESS ) JOSE FILOMMENO ) Defendant. ) __________________________________) I. INTRODUCTION I, AL SMITHSON, declare that I am an attorney, duly licensed to practice law in the State of California and in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California; I am making this declaration on behalf of the material UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

witness, JOSE FILOMMENO, who was arrested on or about October 18, 2007, and has remained in custody since that date. The material in witness the United has no friends, who can neighbors, qualify as or an

acquaintances

States

acceptable surety to accommodate his release from custody.

Case 3:07-cr-03110-WMC

Document 12-2

Filed 11/26/2007

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

The material witness will have been in custody for 57 days as of the hearing date of this motion. To continue to remain in custody

imposes an extreme hardship on the material witness himself and on his family. Material witness JOSE FILOMMENO came to the United States to help his family consisting of his wife, Dores Aristea, who is seven months pregnant, and his nine year old daughter, Noelia Rosalia, both of whom reside in Yucatan, Mexico. In view of these facts, material witness JOSE FILOMMENO seeks an Order for a video deposition from this Court. I have fully explained the procedures involved in this deposition process and received his promise of full cooperation in the video deposition process. I am unaware of any reason why this witness should not be released from custody in this case after the video deposition pursuant to Rule 15 (a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and am further unaware of the existence of a statement of such reason by any other attorney on this case. I believe it would be in the interests of justice to allow the testimony of the material witness in question to be secured by video deposition and to thereafter release the material witness to prevent him from suffering custody any longer than necessary in order to further justice in this case. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: November 26, 2007. /s/ Al Smithson AL SMITHSON, Attorney for Material Witness 2