Free Response - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

DANIEL G. KNAUSS United States Attorney District of Arizona PAUL V. ROOD Assistant U.S. Attorney Arizona State Bar No.004494 [email protected] Two Renaissance Square 40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 Telephone: (602) 514-7500

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA United States of America, CR-04-1299-PHX-EHC Plaintiff, v. Manuel A. Gamboa, Defendant. The United States of America, through undersigned counsel responds to the defendant's GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO CALL WITNESSES AT THE MARCH 16, 2007 HEARING

15 Notice to Call Witness with a request for clarification of the purpose of the hearing. This 16 response is based upon the following memorandum of points and authorities. 17 Excludable delay under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) may occur as a result of this motion or an 18 order based thereon. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Respectfully submitted this 13th day of March, 2007. DANIEL G. KNAUSS United States Attorney District of Arizona s/ PAUL V. ROOD PAUL V. ROOD Assistant U.S. Attorney

Case 2:04-cr-01299-EHC

Document 73

Filed 03/13/2007

Page 1 of 3

1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities: 2 Defendant has filed a notice to call witnesses at the hearing set for March 16, 2007 at 1:30

3 p.m. The Government seeks clarification as to the purpose of the hearing. 4 After the defendant filed his motion to Set Aside Plea; Strike Indictment; Alternatively

5 to Correct Sentence; Waive Subsequent and Superceding Indictment and Plea to Superceding 6 Information; Request for Bail Pending Hearing, the court designated the matter a "2255" 7 pleading, the government then filed a motion to dismiss for timeliness. The defendant replied 8 and the court set a March 16, 2007 hearing. The defendant then filed a notice of intent to call 9 witnesses at the hearing. 10 A reading of the second paragraph of Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255 indicates

11 that the court is to serve notice upon the United States Attorney of a hearing on the merits. It 12 is assumed that until that notice is served, there is no response required by the United States 13 Attorney as to the merits of the defendant's motion. 14 Having received no such notice, the government believes the purpose of the hearing is

15 to determine if the defendant's motion is timely under the provisions of Title 28, United States 16 Code, Section 2255 . 17 If the purpose of the hearing is otherwise, the government would need sufficient time to

18 answer the merits of the defendant's motion. Until the issue of timeliness is determined, no such 19 response was to be forthcoming. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
2

Respectfully submitted this 13th day of March, 2007. DANIEL G. KNAUSS United States Attorney District of Arizona s/PAUL V. ROOD PAUL V. ROOD Assistant U.S. Attorney

Case 2:04-cr-01299-EHC

Document 73

Filed 03/13/2007

Page 2 of 3

1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on March 13, 2007, I electronically transmitted the attached 3 document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF system for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Clyde Stephan Munsell. 4 s/Paul V. Rood 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
3

Case 2:04-cr-01299-EHC

Document 73

Filed 03/13/2007

Page 3 of 3