Free Order on Motion to Dismiss All Charges - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Felizardo Ramos-Montoya, 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The court has before it the United States' Motion to Dismiss Petition to Revoke Supervised Release (doc. 21). The motion does not state any reason why the petition should be dismissed. Indeed, it alludes to a new charge in 07-CR-1599. Typically, when there is a new charge while a defendant is on supervised release, both proceedings go forward and the disposition on the supervised release would be consecutive to the sentence in the new case. Sometimes, the parties enter into a consolidated plea agreement which resolves both the new charge and the supervised release matter in a single plea agreement. But in that case, the petition to revoke supervised release would remain pending until ultimate resolution. For example, here, the petition to revoke supervised release alleges that supervised release will likely expire on November 29, 2007. This means that in the event a consolidated plea agreement is rejected, one would still need a petition to revoke supervised release which could not be filed after the three years expired. The current petition is timely filed.
Case 2:02-cr-00203-DCB Document 22 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, Plaintiff, vs.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CR 02-0203-PHX-FJM ORDER

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

For all these reasons, the Motion to Dismiss Petition to Revoke Supervised Release is DENIED (doc. 21). Now, if there are other factors or reasons that would support a motion to dismiss that are not addressed in this motion to dismiss, this denial is without prejudice to the right of the government to file a new motion stating specific reasons for the dismissal. DATED this 11th day of October, 2007.

-2Case 2:02-cr-00203-DCB Document 22 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 2 of 2