Opinion
Criminal Case No. 10-cr-00317-REB-02
04-06-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. 2. RICHARD KELLOGG ARMSTRONG, Defendant.
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT'S NOTICES
Blackburn, J.
The matter is before me on the following: (1) the NOTICE Forgive Me Request And Constructive Notice of Conditional Acceptance And Request To Continue the Public Proceedings [#459]; (2) the NOTICE Notice of Tender for Setoff [#460]; (3) the NOTICE Forgive Me Request And Constructive Notice of Conditional Acceptance And Request To Continue the Public Proceedings [#461]; and] (4) the NOTICE Notice of Tender for Setoff And Request Regarding a Statement of Account [#462]. All four of these unauthorized notices were filed on April 5, 2012, by defendant, Richard Kellogg Armstrong. I strike the notices.
As I have done assiduously during the time that Mr. Armstrong has represented himself, I construe his papers liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200, 167 L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Belmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972)). However, I have not acted as an advocate for Mr. Armstrong.
These notices are both unnecessarily prolix and legally feckless. To the extent that either or both of the notices filed as [#459] and/or [#461] could be tortured sufficiently for them to be construed as motions to continue the trial now set to commence April 9, 2012, then to that extent commensurately each is denied on both procedural and substantive grounds. Procedurally, neither paper is filed in the time and manner specified by REB Cr. Practice Standard II.E.1. and the Second Trial Preparation Conference Order [#403] entered January 24, 2012, at 1, nt. 1. Substantively, neither paper establishes good cause under United States v. West, 826 F.2d 1466, 146970 (10th Cir. 1987) to continue the trial or under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 to exclude time from the time for a speedy trial.
At the risk of perseveration, at least as early as the proceedings on April 7, 2011, I admonished and instructed Mr. Armstrong, to cease and desist from filing notices in lieu of motions. I reiterated and asseverated this requirement in a series of orders, the most recent of which was entered yesterday, April 5, 2012. See Order [#235] at 6-7, ¶ 3.a.; Order [#251] at 4-5, ¶ 7; Order [364] at 2, ¶ 2.a.; Order [395] at 3, ¶ 4.a.; and Order [#463] at 2-3, ¶ 5. Notwithstanding, Mr. Armstrong filed the four "notices" described above. Thus, his notices will be stricken as violative of my oral and written orders.
Additionally, I will issue a separate, third Order To Show Cause, requiring Mr. Armstrong to show cause in writing by a date certain why he should not be found guilty of contempt of court and punished accordingly. Finally, I will reiterate and asseverate my orders that Mr. Armstrong cease and desist from filing notices in lieu of motions and that he not file any additional pretrial motions or papers without advance leave of this court.
I entered the first Order To Show Cause [#378] on December 16, 2011, and have not yet had the time to enter the second order to show cause that I promised in my order [#463] entered April 5, 2012.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the unauthorized NOTICE Forgive Me Request And Constructive Notice of Conditional Acceptance And Request To Continue the Public Proceedings [#459] filed April 5, 2012, is STRICKEN;
2. That the unauthorized NOTICE Notice of Tender for Setoff [#460] filed April 5, 2012, is STRICKEN;
3. That the unauthorized NOTICE Forgive Me Request And Constructive Notice of Conditional Acceptance And Request To Continue the Public Proceedings [#461] filed April 5, 2012, is STRICKEN;
4. That the unauthorized NOTICE Notice of Tender for Setoff And Request Regarding a Statement of Account [#462] filed April 5, 2012, is STRICKEN; and
5. That once again the defendant, Richard Kellogg Armstrong, subject to the penalties for contempt of court:
I rehearsed those penalties for Mr. Armstrong in the Order To Show Cause [#378] entered December 16, 2011, and during the contempt advisement proceedings I conducted on January 24, 2012. See Courtroom Minutes [#404] at 4.
a. shall not file any paper as a "notice" (as opposed to and distinguished from a "motion") without advance leave of the court; and
b. shall not file any pretrial motion or other paper without advance leave of the court.
This order does not prohibit or enjoin Mr. Armstrong from filing a motion seeking leave of the court to file a motion or other paper in this case.
--------
Dated April 6, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
____________
Robert E. Blackburn
United States District Judge