From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Lavanture

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Mar 12, 2003
02 Crim. 0198 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2003)

Opinion

02 Crim. 0198 (LAK)

March 12, 2003


ORDER


Defendant has been charged on a misdemeanor information with violation of 18 U.S.C. § 709 — in substance, with falsely passing himself off as associated with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. He recently has submitted through his appointed counsel, who himself has indicated that he intends to file no motions on defendant's behalf, a pro se motion to dismiss the information.

The crux of the motion to dismiss is a contention that various documents that defendant has attached to his papers disprove the charge against him. Defendant fails to appreciate, however, that there is no analog in criminal practice to motions for summary judgment in civil cases. The question whether the government can prove plaintiff guilty beyond a reasonable doubt occurs at trial so long as the accusatory instrument is legally sufficient. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied.

Read generously, defendant's papers make a number of other contentions, albeit none too clearly. These include claims that he has not been treated well while in federal custody, that he should have been returned to state custody despite the fact that he is awaiting trial in this Court, that the government is concealing exculpatory evidence, and that the prosecution is the product of racial discrimination.

Insofar as defendant seeks discovery, the contention is properly before the Court. The government is directed to comply with its obligations under Brady and Fed.R.Crim.P. 16 to the extent, if any, that it has not done so already, a matter as to which the Court expresses no view. The balance of defendant's contentions are inappropriate for resolution in this case. For example, the proper vehicle for raising any grievances regarding the conditions of his incarceration would be a civil action, while any contention that his current federal custody is unlawful may be raised by a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Accordingly, exception as noted above, the motion is denied in all respects.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Lavanture

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Mar 12, 2003
02 Crim. 0198 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2003)
Case details for

U.S. v. Lavanture

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA against RUDY LAVANTURE, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Mar 12, 2003

Citations

02 Crim. 0198 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2003)