From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Clark

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Dec 2, 2022
21-cr-00132-SI-1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2022)

Opinion

21-cr-00132-SI-1

12-02-2022

USA, Plaintiff, v. LINDSAY MARIE CLARK, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELEASE OF ZOOM RECORDING RE: DKT. NO. 93

SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court is the government's motion for release of the Zoom recording of the change of plea hearing held in this case on November 22, 2022. Dkt. No. 93. The government states that it “does not intend to use this recording in lieu of a transcript” but does not identify a reason for requesting the recording. Id. Nor does the government identify any authority to support its request. Id. The parties consented to the use of Zoom proceedings as well as the Court's telephonic appearance at the November 22 hearing and were made aware that while the Court would record the hearing, recording by any other party was prohibited. While the government may request the official transcripts, the Court will not release the unofficial Zoom recording of proceedings. The government's motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Clark

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Dec 2, 2022
21-cr-00132-SI-1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2022)
Case details for

U.S. v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:USA, Plaintiff, v. LINDSAY MARIE CLARK, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Dec 2, 2022

Citations

21-cr-00132-SI-1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2022)