Free Motion to Quash - 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

LAW OFFICE OF

RICHARD B. BACAL
10 EAST BROADWAY, SUITE 406 TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701 TELEPHONE (520) 740-1213 Pima County Computer No. 64685 Arizona State Bar No. 014320 Attorney for: Felizardo Ramos-Montoya

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) Plaintiff, ) CR 02-203 PHX DCB ) vs. ) MOTION TO QUASH WARRANT AND ) VACATE ALL REVOCATION HEARINGS FELIZARDO RAMOS-MONTOYA, ) ) (Hon Glenda E. Edmonds re: Defendant. ) Init. Appearance 11/13/07) ) COMES NOW THE DEFENDANT, FELIZARDO RAMOS-MONTOYA, by and through undersigned counsel (representing Defendant in related case CR 07-1599 TUC DCB) and hereby moves to quash the arrest warrant, dismiss, or at minimum hold in abeyance, the Petition on Supervised Release, and vacate or not set any hearings regarding Revocation of Supervised release, pursuant to specific performance of the plea agreement in the related case, General Order 05-29, and LRCrim. 5.1(a)(2)(d). In the above-captioned matter, Defendant was sentenced to 39 months imprisonment followed by 36 months supervised release. Release supervision began November 29, 2004 and was scheduled to terminate on November 28, 2007. In the interim, Defendant was UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

charged with illegal re-entry in the related case, CR 07-1599 TUC DCB, following his arrest on August 15, 2007. At the time of his

arrest, Defendant had been on Supervised Release for well over one year, actually within three months of the expiration of the three Case 2:02-cr-00203-DCB Document 24 Filed 11/10/2007 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 24 25 26 27 28

year period. On October 11, 2007, Defendant plead guilty in the related case pursuant to a written plea agreement. The plea agreement

acknowledges Defendants Supervised Release status in this case at the time of his new arrest. The plea agreement is of the "all-in-

one" variety; the ranges of imprisonment incorporate recognition of his violating supervised release. The written plea further states

agreement "that the term of supervised release originally imposed shall be unsuccessfully terminated." CR 07-1599 TUC DCB, Dct 10, p.3, ll 22-23. Judge Bury accepted Defendant's guilty plea (not

yet the plea agreement) on October 30, 2007. Any prosecution by the government at this time for supervised release violation violates the plea agreement. Additionally, the

local rule and general order cited herein bestows upon the judge in the subsequent re-entry case the opportunity to decide upon request for unsuccessful termination of supervised release, sans objection from the previous judge. This case having now been transferred to

Judge Bury should proceed no further until sentencing in the related case, set on January 3, 2008. Wherefore, Defendant requests the warrant be quashed, the petition be dismissed without prejudice [Defendant accepts that supervised release time is now tolled], or all hearings on

revocation vacated or held in abeyance. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 10th day of November, 2007. LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD B. BACAL s/ Richard B. Bacal Attorney for Defendant Delivered this day via ECF

-2Case 2:02-cr-00203-DCB Document 24 Filed 11/10/2007 Page 2 of 2