Free Objection to Presentence Investigation Report - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6

Ann e M . W illiam s, P.C . Anne M. W illiams #012414 PM B 265 1833 East Baseline Road Gilbert, AZ. 85233-1545 amw illiams@ cox.net T: 480.892.7177 F: 480.471.6652 Attorn ey for R obe rt W irth

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
v. United States of America Plaintiff, OBJECTION TO SUPERVISED RELEASED DISPOSITION REPORT CR 04-50185-PHX-FJM

RO BERT W IRT H, JR., De fendan t. __________________________________

Counsel for Mr. Robert W irth, Jr., hereby files this objection to the mis-characterization and misinterpretation of the statement of counsel on behalf of Mr. W irth. Specifically, counsel references Pg. 4, Subsection "Justification," Paragraph 3, Line 1, Probation Officer Barquin places in quotes that counsel for Mr. W irth asked that Mr. W irth be sentenced to the "max." The word is taken out of context given the inquiry regarding Mr. W irth's potential se nten ce. Sh ortly after Mr. W irth's Arraignm ent, Counsel fo r M r. W irth conveyed to Mr. Barquin M r. W irth's inquiry as to what would it take to terminate his supervised release. In so many words, the inquiry was W hat would it take to "max" out the time that Mr. Wirth was facing such that he would not have a tail of sup ervised re lease? W ithout fu rther discuss ion, M r. Barquin indicated that he did no t kno w tha t answer. Mr. W irth's point, in mak ing the inquiry, was to eliminate further supervised release upon com pletion of a p rison term .

Case 2:04-cr-50185-FJM

Document 33

Filed 06/08/2006

Page 1 of 3

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

Sinc e the time of th at initial inquiry, M r. Barquin and cou nse l for Mr. W irth hav e no t talked. Although it is unders tandable how that inquiry could be taken to m ean a m axim um term, m ore precisely, the inquiry was meant to ascertain what sentence would finalize Mr. W irth's federal supervised release. Counsel for Mr. W irth would like to clarify with the court that Mr. W irth never asked counsel to ask the proba tion officer to "m ax" him out, sente nce -wise . It was Mr. W irth's concern that he and M r. Barquin were at odds, tha t Mr. W irth felt it was likely he would never perform to Mr. Barquin's satisfaction and that other "violations" of supervised release would continue to be filed against him. Therefore, Mr. W irth sought to complete a prison sentence and terminate su pervised release. Ho wever, without know ing what that term of im prisonm ent m ight be, Mr. W irth never had the opportunity to agree to or disagree with that option. Depending upon the sentence, Mr. W irth m ight have had a change of h eart about s upervised rele ase, m ight have rec onsidered his willingness to try harder on release and might have changed his perspective regarding continued sup ervised re lease status. Lastly, assum ing that the sentencing ranges conveyed in the sentenc ing recom m endation are "m axim um " sentences , the probation officer has requested, on top of "m axing out" Mr. W irth, a term the reafter of s upervised rele ase. T his rec om m endation not only negates the objec tive of M r. W irth's inquiry, but presents a dual penalty to him, i.e., maxim um term of imprisonment plus a term of supervised release therea fter. O bviou sly, such a re sult was n ot M r. W irth's, nor cou nse l's, intent.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED VIA ECM/EF:

/S/ ANNE M. W ILLIAMS AN NE M. W ILLIA MS , P.C.

Case 2:04-cr-50185-FJM

Document 33

-2Filed 06/08/2006

Page 2 of 3

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

Copy of the foregoing served this date via transmittal of Notice of Electronic Filing to CM /ECF reg istrant(s): Ms. Darcy Cerow darcy.cerow@ usdoj.gov Ms. Anne M. Williams, P.C. amw illiams@ cox.net Courtesy Copy Provided to: [email protected]

Case 2:04-cr-50185-FJM

Document 33

-3Filed 06/08/2006

Page 3 of 3