Opinion
CRIMINAL ACTION 20-43-SDD-RLB
03-31-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROBERT EARL TUCKER, JR.
RULING
Before the Court are various recently filed motions by Defendant, Robert Earl Tucker, Jr. ("Defendant"), representing himself pro se, who is set for Sentencing on April 15, 2021. The Court rules on the motions as follows:
Defendant moves to recuse the undersigned pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 455(a). Defendant offers confusing arguments about the evidence admitted at his jury trial and a timeline of his prior motions and the Court's rulings. Defendant also "(now) files motion to poll jury," although the jurors were, in fact, polled upon the Government's motion after rendering their verdicts. Defendant claims the undersigned was "duty bound (administrative) to inform the court, i.e. defense and jurors, of any new relevant evidence by means of sequester." Defendant fails to identify this evidence or how this Court allegedly violated FRE 16 regarding discovery. Defendant goes on to argue that the undersigned should be recused for a variety of rulings previously made by this Court with which Defendant disagrees. Defendant presents no legal or nonfrivolous basis for this motion. Accordingly, the Motions for Recusal of Magistrate (sic) Shelly Dick are hereby DENIED.
Rec. Doc. Nos. 157, 160.
Rec. Doc. No. 157, p. 1.
Rec. Doc. No. 101, p. 2.
Rec. Doc. No. 160, p. 1.
Rec. Doc. Nos. 157, 160.
Defendant's Motion to Suppress, Motion to Vacate Arrest Warrant, Motion to Sequester Jury, and Motion for Non-Disclosure, for Discovery, and Disclosure are DENIED as moot, considering Defendant's conviction, and as legally without merit.
Rec. Doc. No. 152.
Rec. Doc. No. 153.
Rec. Doc. No. 154.
Rec. Doc. No. 161.
Defendant has also filed a Motion to Deny/Vacate Extradition, which appears to challenge the "extradition served by United States Marshal on June 24, 2020." Defendant cites "Criminal Code Article 278" which he claims states: "A magistrate must sign to extradite a prisoner from one state to another state." No further argument is made regarding this claim, and Defendant proceeds to address the same issues of recusal and discovery requests made in other motions. This motion is legally frivolous and meritless, as extradition is not an issue in this matter. Accordingly, the Motion to Deny/Vacate Extradition is hereby DENIED.
Rec. Doc. No. 155.
Id. at p. 1.
Id.
Rec. Doc. No. 155.
Finally, Defendant has filed a Motion for MDLA to Sanction WBR Detention Center Not to Schedule Any Psychiatric Visits for Robert Tucker, Jr., claiming such visits are "inadmissible." Defendant essentially reargues his disagreement with the jury's conclusions regarding his mental state when rendering guilty verdicts following his trial. Defendant cites no authority for this Court to sanction the WBR Detention Center for providing him medical care, which it is required to do. Defendant is free to utilize the administrative remedy process available at the WBR Detention Center to lodge complaints about his medical care and treatment. This Motion is hereby DENIED.
Rec. Doc. No. 158.
Id. --------
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on March 31, 2021.
/s/ _________
CHIEF JUDGE SHELLY D. DICK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA