Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

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

PAUL K. CHARLTON United States Attorney District of Arizona MARY BETH PFISTER Assistant U.S. Attorney Two Renaissance Square 40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 Arizona State Bar No. 015103 Telephone (602) 514-7500 [email protected]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA United States of America,
CR-04-874-PHX-RGS

Plaintiff, v. 2. Cherie Vigil, Defendant. The United States of America, by and through its attorney undersigned, hereby responds to Defendant's Motion for Order of Dismissal with Prejudice and asks that the Court deny that Motion. On February 10, of 2005, the government filed a motion to dismiss the Indictment against Cherie Vigil that was returned in this matter on August 18, 2004 without prejudice, in the interest of justice. Vigil was an employee of the Arizona Motor Vehicle Division ("MVD") who was charged, along with her five co-defendants, with one count of Conspiracy to Produce False Identification Documents and with two counts of Production of False Identification Documents. All of the charges against Vigil stemmed from the production of fraudulent Arizona driver's licenses that occurred on April 24, 2004. Undercover agents, representing themselves as individuals without proper documentation to obtain a driver's license, arranged with some of Vigil's co-defendants (the brokers) to purchase these licenses. MVD records show that Vigil, a MVD customer service representative, produced the licenses. Subsequent to the unsealing of the indictment in this case and the arrest of all of the defendants, the investigation in this case continued, switching from a covert investigation to an overt one. Information obtained during this subsequent investigation indicated that Vigil's coCase 2:04-cr-00874-RGS Document 108 Filed 01/31/2006 Page 1 of 3

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

defendant, Melissa Fernandez, also a MVD customer service representative, actually produced the fraudulent licenses issued on April 24, 2004, although she did so using Vigil's MVD identification number. Handwriting exemplars also were taken from Fernandez and Vigil and compared to the handwriting on the applications for the fraudulent licenses, and this comparison corroborates that Fernandez, not Vigil, processed the applications for the fraudulent licenses. For these reasons, on February 10, 2005, the government asked that the charges against Vigil in the Indictment be dismissed without prejudice. Defendant did not object at that time to the dismissal being without prejudice. The Court granted the government's motion on February 15, 2005. Now, nearly a year after the government filed its motion, defendant moves for a dismissal with prejudice. Granting that motion would be improper, as there is no pending indictment to dismiss. The indictment previously was dismissed without prejudice, and defendant did not object. Accordingly, defendant's motion is moot and should be denied. Respectfully submitted this 31st day of January, 2006. PAUL K. CHARLTON United States Attorney District of Arizona s/Mary Beth Pfister

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case 2:04-cr-00874-RGS Document 108 Filed 01/31/2006 Page 2 of 3

MARY BETH PFISTER Assistant U.S. Attorney

1 2 3 4 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on January 31, 2006, I electronically transmitted the attached 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 registrant:

Natman Schaye, Esq. 69 North Lazy Place Tucson, Arizona 85745-2871 7 Counsel for Defendant
6 8 9

s/Carol Strachan Carol Strachan Legal Assistant 11 U.S. Attorney's Office
10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Case 2:04-cr-00874-RGS Document 108 Filed 01/31/2006 Page 3 of 3