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

1
DAVID Z. CHESNOFF, Esq.
2 CHESNOFF & SCHONFELD
520 South Fourth Street
3 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
4 Attorney for Defendant
Calvin B. Schaefer
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
7 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8 * * * * *
9 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
_ )
· 10 Plaintiff, ) Case No. 2: O3-CR-01167 -OO6-PHX- DGC
M 1 1 )
5 vs. )
¤ E 3 12 )
Fg E $ s )
g 3 E § B 13 CALVIN B. SCHAEFER, )
( Q Q
@5 5 E Z 14 )
Ew § S 2 N Defendant. )
¤¤g£a9
zu- 5 I Z g 15
:*6 z g 22 as
§ E Q § Q 16 DEFENDANT SCHAEFER’S FORMAL OBJECTIONS TO PSI REPORT
'i gg <
5 E 17 ·
E 1 8 COMES NOW, the Defendant, CALVIN B. SCHAEFER, by and through undersigned
1 9 counsel and respectfully submits the followin Objections to the PSI Report:
3
2 O l. Page 4, paragraph 1, lists charges that are unrelated to Calvin and charges that he
2 1 _
did not plead guilty to. Those statements are irrelevant to Calvin’s PSI report and
2 2
should be stricken;
23
2 4 2. Page 4, paragraph 4, this paragraph is also irrelevant and unrelated to Calvin and
25 should be stricken from the report;
2 6
2 7
28 1
Case 2:03—cr—01167—DGO Document 1412 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 1 of 4

1
3. Page 5, paragraph 5, this paragraph is irrelevant and unrelated to Calvin and should
2
be stricken from the report;
3
4 4. Page 5, paragraph 7, this paragraph is unrelated to Calvin and is irrelevant. It
5 shouldbe stricken from the report;
6 5. Page 6, paragraphs 9, 10, and ll are all unrelated to Calvin, are unnecessarily
7 prejudicial, and are irrelevant. Those paragraphs should be removed from the
8
report;
9
10 6. Page 6, paragraph 12 misstates what Calvin agreed to forfeit. The Plea Agreement
1 1 and Attachment A to the plea agreement speak for themselves. Calvin did not agree
D E ,,, 12 to forfeit HAMC related documents, notes, etc. Although the Probation Officer
J ° 1- iii
I.|.I & ld up M
Ig lj 5 § 13 claims that this paragraph was amended, it is still not accurate;
pj < Ul 01 Q
‘“ I 5 I °° g 14
§§ 'Q g § 7. Page 6, paragraph 13, this paragraph references the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club
<> ~ 1* “ 15
i '*— E Z Fl . . . . . .
jg g § gt? 3 as an international organization engaged rn Racketeerrng etc. No Court has ever
Z z m 0 < 16
m 2 M 5
g E § E ‘ 17 reached that conclusion, nor did any of the Defendants in this case admit to such
O .1
E lg an allegation. That language must be removed from the PSI as it is prejudicial,
19 irrelevant, and inaccurate;
20 8. Page 7, paragraphs 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23, are all irrelevant,
2 1
prejudicial and inappropriately included in the PS1. Mr. Schaefer has pled guilty to
22
23 Possession of a Firearm in furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime. He has not
2 4 pled guilty to a Hells Angel conspiracy nor has he admitted any of the allegations
25 contained in these paragraphs. Moreover, the United States dismissed the Rico
2 6 charges and abandoned the allegations that you are raising in the PS1 report. There
2 7 should be no reference to the Hells Angels in the PSI report;
2 8
Case 2:03-cr—01167-DGC Document 1412 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 2 of 4

1 9. Pages 8 through 12, paragraph 24 as it relates to the co-defendants these paragraphs
; are unnecessary and contain prejudicial and inaccurate statements regarding the
4 Hells Angels as described above. Again, Calvin did not plead guilty to a
5 conspiracy. He pled guilty to a single count involving his conduct and nobody
6 else’s conduct. There should be no language regarding the Hells Angels in the PS1
7 Report. The government could not prove those allegations and dismissed said
8
allegations;
9
10 10. Page 10, paragraph regarding Calvin Schaefer. This paragraph should not reference
m 1 1 the Hells Angels. Furthermore, as stated in the factual basis for the Plea Agreement
E g P § 12 Calvin admitted to one drug transaction while in possession of a 9mm pistol. This
E § g 13 paragraph of the PSI outlines two drug transactions and a firearm at Calvin’s home.
Eg § g E IS 15 Those are not the facts that Calvin pled guilty to;
Eg g g Lg 16 11. Page 12, paragraph 26, this paragraph is irrelevant to what Calvin has admitted to.
§ g § § E 17 Furthermore, Calvin is not a member of the Cave Creek charter of the Hells
g 18 Angeles. lf you insist on including this paragraph, you should also include the fact
19 that the Glendale Police department shot a prospective member during execution of
2 0 the search at the Cave Creek clubhouse in what the Arizona Superior Court has
2; deemed an inappropriate "attack" on the clubhouse. The Glendale Police
2 3 Department is currently being sued as a result of the attack on the clubhouse;
2 4 12. Page 13, paragraph 33, this paragraph should not reference an altercation between
25 the Hells Angels and the Mongols, as the plea agreement related to the Laughlin
26 case specifically provided that there was no Racketeering related to the Hells
2 7
2 8 3
Case 2:03—cr—01167—DGC Document 1412 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 3 of 4

1
Angels;
2
3 13. Page 21, paragraphs 84-85, again these paragraphs inappropriately reference
4 Racketeering. The government dismissed that part of their case after lengthy
5 litigation related to those counts. There is no reason to include reference to the
6 Racketeering allegations that the government dismissed;
7 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this { J! day of December, 2006.
2
CHESNOFF & SCHONFELD
9
“’
1 1 David Z. Chesnoff Esq.
g Attorney for Defendant CALVIN SCHAEFER
5 12
D ¤= g
¤°5“§§
55 2 1 g ·:· 14
¤mg§<~
15
5oB§28 `
§ S ·¤ B & 16
g § .2 5
u § 5 17
E 18
19
20 _
212
22
23 ‘
24
25
26
27 A
28 4
Case 2:03-cr—01167-DGC Document 1412 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 4 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-01167-DGC

Document 1412

Filed 12/06/2006

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-01167-DGC

Document 1412

Filed 12/06/2006

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-01167-DGC

Document 1412

Filed 12/06/2006

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-01167-DGC

Document 1412

Filed 12/06/2006

Page 4 of 4