From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Sobel

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 24, 2022
2:21-cr-00235-APG-EJY (D. Nev. Aug. 24, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-cr-00235-APG-EJY

08-24-2022

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. HAROLD DAVID SOBEL, Defendant.

Jacob B. Lee NV Bar No. 012428 Ashlee B. Hesman NV Bar No. 012740 STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO, PLC Gina G. Winspear Nevada Bar No. 005552 DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP Attorneys for Non-Party CoreCivic, Inc. JASON FRIERSON United States Attorney MINA CHANG Assistant United States Attorney GUSTAV W. EYLER Director, U.S. Department of Justice MEREDITH BURNS HEALY Trial Attorney WEI XIANG Trial Attorney JACQUELINE TIRINNANZI, ESQ. Counsel for Harold David Sobel


Jacob B. Lee

NV Bar No. 012428

Ashlee B. Hesman

NV Bar No. 012740

STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO, PLC

Gina G. Winspear

Nevada Bar No. 005552

DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP

Attorneys for Non-Party CoreCivic, Inc.

JASON FRIERSON

United States Attorney

MINA CHANG

Assistant United States Attorney

GUSTAV W. EYLER

Director, U.S. Department of Justice

MEREDITH BURNS HEALY

Trial Attorney

WEI XIANG

Trial Attorney

JACQUELINE TIRINNANZI, ESQ.

Counsel for Harold David Sobel

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR CORECIVIC'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RELEASE AND TO REPLY REGARDING THE MOTION AND PROPOSED ORDER

(SECOND REQUEST)

HONORABLE ANDREW P. GORDON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Jason Frierson, United States Attorney for the District of Nevada, and Mina Chang, Assistant United States Attorney, and Gustav W. Eyler, Director, and Meredith B. Healy and Wei Xiang, Trial Attorneys, U.S. Department of Justice, Consumer Protection Branch, counsel for the United States of America; Jacqueline Tirinnanzi and Kathleen Bliss, counsel for Harold David Sobel (“Defendant”); and Jacob B. Lee, counsel for Non-Party CoreCivic, Inc. (“CoreCivic”), that the parties request this Court to extend the deadline for CoreCivic to file its Response to Defendant's Motion for Release Pending Sentencing and Supplement (Dkt. 55, 58) by one day to August 23, 2022.

On July 22, 2022, Defendant filed a Motion for Release Pending Sentencingl (Dkt. 55) and on July 29, 2022, filed a Supplement to the Motion (Dkt. 58). The general basis of the Motion concerned Defendant's medical care at CoreCivic's Nevada Southern Detention Center (“NSDC”), where he is currently detained. The government filed its Response to Defendant's Motion on August 5, 2022. (Dkt. 61.) That same day, CoreCivic filed a Notice Regarding Defendant's Motion for Release Pending Sentencing and Supplement. (Dkt. 64.) On August 8, 2022, this Court ordered CoreCivic to file a Response as to Defendant's medical care by August 22, 2022. (Dkt. 65.)

Defendant and the government thereafter stipulated and requested that the Court allow Defendant to file his Reply to the government's and CoreCivic's responses within three days of the filing of CoreCivic's Response and for the government to file a Reply only as to CoreCivic's Response by the same date-i.e., by August 25, 2022. (Dkt. 66.) The Court granted the stipulation on August 15, 2022. (Dkt. 67.)

Due to unforeseen logistical complications, CoreCivic has been unable to finalize the Declaration of Jay Peterson, APRN, who is one of Defendant's medical providers at NSDC. Extending the deadline for CoreCivic's Response by one day to August 23, 2022 will allow CoreCivic to finalize APRN Peterson's Declaration and obtain his signature on it. In light of this extension, the parties further stipulate and request that the Court extend the government's and Defendant's deadline to file their Replies to August 26, 2022.

Denial of this request would deny CoreCivic the ability to provide the Court with a complete picture of the care Defendant is receiving at NSDC and would deny counsel for Defendant the opportunity to prepare a complete Reply to the additional information to be provided by CoreCivic as it relates to this original Motion and Supplement. This stipulation and request for extension of these deadlines is mindful of the exercise of due diligence, in the interests of justice, and not for any purposes of delay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Sobel

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 24, 2022
2:21-cr-00235-APG-EJY (D. Nev. Aug. 24, 2022)
Case details for

United States v. Sobel

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. HAROLD DAVID SOBEL, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Aug 24, 2022

Citations

2:21-cr-00235-APG-EJY (D. Nev. Aug. 24, 2022)