Free Dismissal of Counts Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 65.4 kB
Pages: 1
Date: March 30, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 376 Words, 2,300 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/21845/150.pdf

Download Dismissal of Counts Motion - District Court of Connecticut ( 65.4 kB)


Preview Dismissal of Counts Motion - District Court of Connecticut
. - l
·· ‘ I Case 3:03-cr-00100;RNC Document 150 Filed 03/20/2005 Page 1 of 1 `
ar)
XK
lk F]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F0 3
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT 2005 M" ‘ "
M4}? 22
rs . D M: I, —
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : Docket No. 3:03C%l/é )__ I ,
- ` f*.¢?.fI*~ JW _ i
- {
JUAN ROSARIO : March 22, 2005
ga MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS TWO AND THREE OF THE INDICTMENT !
fil
Pursuant to Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and in accordance I
¤
ua ·¤·>’ . .
Q with the terms of the plea agreement entered by the parties on or about June 13, 2003, the ,
M 2 · °
4% Government hereby moves, post-sentencing, to dismiss Counts Two and Three of the Indictment X
5 . .
5 i ;r i
O *`T~» . . . . . . A
Et % &a agr;§me% gosanoc (1) pleaded guilty to Count One of the Indictment, charging him with a I I
' ‘ . OO @§sp1racy to ifogsess with intent to distrrbute and d1str1but1on of 500 grams or more of cocaine; l
¤ .....5 r $3 ii‘:?»ci i
CL W égiagreg to tgegiforfeittire of the $17,315.00 in United States currecncy set forth in Count Three
of the I mctingntg and (3 pleaded uilty to an additional one-count information, char ing him j
S S .
with a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribution of 100 grams or more of
heroin. In light of the above, and pursuant to the terms ofthe plea agreement, the Government
respectfully requests that the Court dismiss Counts Two and Three of the Indictment as against I 7
the defendant, Juan Rosario.
l
I The forfeiture allegation was perhaps erroneously identified here as an additional "count" i
in the Indictment- the current practice is to simply notice items identified for forfeiture and the basis
therefore in a "forfeiture allegation," rather than as a separate count. Because the forfeiture "count" i
nevertheless served the purposes of proper notice and the defendant agreed to the forfeiture of the
$17,315.00 as part of his plea agreement, as a practical matter, the government sees no reason why
the "forfeiture count" cannot be dismissed to clean up the docket. ‘