Opinion
Criminal Case No. 08-cr-00340-REB-04.
December 3, 2010
ORDER
The matter before me is defendant's Motion For Jury at Sentencing [#1046] filed December 2, 2010. The chronology of relevant events is as follows. By Minute Order [#925] entered August 13, 2010, a sentencing hearing was set for December 10, 2010. The presentence report was disclosed to counsel on November 5, 2010. See [#1016]. Defendant filed his objections to the presentence report on November 22, 2010. See [#1035]. Defendant's response and objections did not raise or discuss the issue of whether defendant is entitled to a determination of relevant conduct under USSG § 1B1.3 by a jury. Finally, on December 2, 2010, defendant filed his motion that is now before the court.
"[#1046]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.
I am dubious that defendant is entitled to a determination of relevant conduct under USSG § 1B1.3 by a jury. Beyond that, I am certain that I can not resolve the motion between now and the sentencing hearing now set for December 10, 2010. Thus, I enter this order to provide for the orderly consideration and resolution of the issues raised by defendant's motion.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That by December 23, 2010, the government shall file a response to defendant's motion;
2. That by January 6, 2011, the defendant shall file a reply to the government's anticipated response;
3. That the sentencing hearing now set for December 10, 2010, is vacated and continued, pending further order;
4. That all writs of habeas corpus ad testificandum are vacated; and
5. That a copy of this order shall be served on the United States Marshal for the District of Colorado.
Dated December 3, 2010, at Denver, Colorado.