From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Hartsock

United States District Court, D. Maine
Feb 11, 2004
Criminal No. 02-60-B-S (D. Me. Feb. 11, 2004)

Summary

resolving the issue under Fed. R. Evid. 104

Summary of this case from United States v. Shamsid-Deen

Opinion

Criminal No. 02-60-B-S

February 11, 2004


ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE


No objections having been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision filed January 21, 2004, the Recommended Decision is accepted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the June 29, 1992 conviction offered by the United States in support of the indictment is inadmissible because Willard Hartsock has proven that he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel at the time he entered his plea of guilty.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Hartsock

United States District Court, D. Maine
Feb 11, 2004
Criminal No. 02-60-B-S (D. Me. Feb. 11, 2004)

resolving the issue under Fed. R. Evid. 104

Summary of this case from United States v. Shamsid-Deen
Case details for

U.S. v. Hartsock

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. WILLARD HARTSOCK, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Maine

Date published: Feb 11, 2004

Citations

Criminal No. 02-60-B-S (D. Me. Feb. 11, 2004)

Citing Cases

United States v. Shamsid-Deen

Most of those cases approached the issue as an evidentiary question. SeeArtis , 132 F. App'x at 484 ("Artis…