Free Order on Motion to Preclude Statements - 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 Defendant has had seven attorneys including her current attorney. The first attorney was retained; four were appointed under the Criminal Justice Act. One was either retained or a volunteer. A number of motions to continue have been filed by Defense counsel.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA United States of America, Plaintiff, vs. Jeanette Wilcher, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CR 03-1098-PHX-EHC O R D E R

On November 14, 2005, Defendant's CJA appointed Assistant Federal Public Defender filed a "RENEWED MOTION TO PRECLUDE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO REDEPOSE CONNIE GILLASPIE" (Motion) (Dkt. 167). The Motion requested "permission to conduct a new and more complete deposition prior to trial." A supporting

Memorandum alleged that "undersigned counsel believes that the deposition was incomplete." It is also alleged that "the former prosecutor objected to and would not allow the witness to answer questions on these and other topics." (Dkt. 167).1

The video taped deposition of Ms. Gillaspie, was noticed by the Government and taken in Palm Springs, California on

Case 2:03-cr-01098-EHC

Document 185

Filed 03/03/2006

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

December 16, 2004.

Defendant was present with her then CJA A transcript of the It reports that the

appointed attorney Michael Ryan.

Deposition has been filed. (Dkt. 84A).

deposition commenced at 12:25 p.m. December 16, 2004, and was completed at 1:41 p.m. Contrary to the assertion noted earlier in the Renewed Motion, Government counsel never instructed Ms. Gillaspie not to answer a question.2 Ms. Gillaspie's deposition was taken in Palm Springs because of her health problems. She continues to suffer from those same problems. There is no demonstrated reason to take

her further deposition. She is subject to service of a trial subpoena and her ability to appear pursuant to that subpoena can be raised at that time. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant's Renewed Motion to Preclude Videotaped Deposition, or, in the Alternative, Motion to Redepose Connie Gillaspie. (Dkt. 167). DATED this 3rd day of March, 2006.

2

24 25 26 27 28

At page 23 of Exh. 84A, p. 23, Government counsel stated: Objection, again, for the same reason, relevance. And, at some point, I am going to move to tell the witness not to respond if you keep up with this lin (sic) of questioning. It's really an invasion of her privacy as well. -2-

Case 2:03-cr-01098-EHC

Document 185

Filed 03/03/2006

Page 2 of 2