Datasets:
johnearlesullivan
/
main

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
Community
1
text
stringlengths
1
244
a defense motion to reconsider, filed on December 24, 2021, is pending. The defendant’s motion
sought “the joinder and adoption” of arguments made by Caldwell defendants seeking dismissal
of counts charging violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) in “the interests of judicial economy.”
D.E. 62 at 3. That is, the motion sought to join and adopt those arguments to seek dismissal of
Count 1 of the superseding indictment in this case.
At the status hearing on January 4, 2022, the undersigned noted her intent to file the
government’s responsive pleadings from 21-CR-28 in opposition to the defendant’s motion to
dismiss Count 1. The Court decided to stay all briefing. On January 5, 2022, the Court entered
a minute order lifting the stay and requesting a response. The United States hereby moves,
1Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 65 Filed 01/10/22 Page 2 of 3
consistent with the representations at the January 4, 2022 hearing, to oppose dismissal of Count 1
by adopting and joining the arguments opposing dismissal of the § 1512(c)(2) counts as advanced
in three government pleadings from Caldwell: (1) the “Government’s Omnibus Opposition to
Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and for Bill of Particulars,” D.E. 313, the relevant portion of
which is on pages 5-29, and (2) the “Government’s Supplemental Brief on 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2),
D.E. 437, and (3) the “Government’s Opposition to Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Motions
to Dismiss Counts 1 and 2,” D.E. 573. Those three pleadings are attached as exhibits, and unless
directed by the Court to respond otherwise, the government respectfully submits the arguments
therein in opposition to the arguments adopted and joined by the defendant’s motion to seek
dismissal of Count 1.
Respectfully submitted,
MATTHEW M. GRAVES
United States Attorney
D.C. Bar No. 481052
By:
CANDICE C. WONG
Assistant United States Attorney
D.C. Bar No. 990903
555 Fourth Street, N.W., Room 4816
Washington, DC 20530
Candice.wong@usdoj.gov
(202) 252-7849
2Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 65 Filed 01/10/22 Page 3 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on January 10, 2022, I caused a copy of the foregoing motion to be
served on counsel of record via electronic filing.
______________
Candice C. Wong
Assistant United States Attorney
3
Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 66 Filed 01/24/22 Page 1 of 8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :
:
v. : Criminal No. 1:21-cr-00078-EGS
:
JOHN EARLE SULLIVAN, :
Defendant. :
UNITED STATES’ SUPPLEMENT TO OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S “MOTION
TO ADOPT AND JOIN RELEVANT PORTIONS OF MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT 2
OF THE INDICTMENT IN UNITED STATES V. CALDWELL, 21-CR-28 (APM) AND
TO DISMISS COUNT 1 OF THIS SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT”
On January 10, 2022, the government’s opposition to the defendant’s “Motion to Adopt
and Join Relevant Portions of Motion to Dismiss Count 2 of the Indictment in United States v.
Caldwell, 21-cr-28 (APM) and to Dismiss Count 1 of this Superseding Indictment” attached three
of the government’s responsive pleadings from 21-CR-28. On January 24, 2022, Judge Mehta
denied reconsideration of his denial of the relevant motions to dismiss in 21-CR-28. The
government hereby respectfully submits the Memorandum Opinion and Order denying
reconsideration as a supplement to the government’s January 10, 2022 opposition.
Respectfully submitted,
MATTHEW M. GRAVES
United States Attorney
D.C. Bar No. 481052
By:
CANDICE C. WONG
Assistant United States Attorney
D.C. Bar No. 990903
555 Fourth Street, N.W., Room 4816
Washington, DC 20530
Candice.wong@usdoj.gov
(202) 252-7849Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 66 Filed 01/24/22 Page 2 of 8
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on January 24, 2022, I caused a copy of the foregoing supplement to
be served on counsel of record via electronic filing.
______________
Candice C. Wong
Assistant United States AttorneyCase 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 66 Filed 01/24/22 Page 3 of 8
EXHIBITCCaassee 1 1:2:211--ccrr--0000002788--AEPGMS DDooccuummeenntt 56966 F Filieledd 0 011/2/244/2/222 P Paaggee 4 1 o of f8 5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Case No. 21-cr-28 (APM)
)
THOMAS E. CALDWELL, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
_________________________________________ )
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Thomas E. Caldwell asks the court to reconsider its decision denying his and
other Defendants’ motions to dismiss Counts 1 and Count 2 of the Sixth Superseding Indictment
based on a statutory construction argument that he had every opportunity to make before the court
ruled. See Def. Caldwell’s Req. for Recons. Regarding Court’s Ruling on Mots. to Dismiss Counts
1 & 2 (18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)), ECF No. 566 [hereinafter Def.’s Mot.]. Caldwell’s motion is
procedurally deficient, and it is wrong on the merits. It is denied.
I.
The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure do not address the legal standard applicable to