Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Sampica

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

July 13, 2015

United States of America,
v.
Mark David Sampica, Defendant.

Kimberly A. Svendsen, United States Attorney's Office, 600 U.S. Courthouse, 300 South Fourth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415, for Plaintiff.

Mark David Sampica, 11145 Hillsboro Avenue, Champlin, Minnesota 55316, Pro Se.

Thomas E. Bauer, Thomas Bauer and Associates, 14225 Highway 55, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447, for Defendant.

ORDER

SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on Defendant Mark David Sampica's Pro Se Motion for an Emergency Stay of Imprisonment Pending Appeal [Doc. No. 33].[1] Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, the Court denies Defendant's motion.

I. BACKGROUND

On February 23, 2015, Sampica entered a guilty plea to a charge of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. On June 23, 2015, this Court sentenced Sampica to an 18-month term of imprisonment, followed by a two-year term of supervised release. (Minute Entry of 6/23/15 [Doc. No. 21].) The Court recommended to the Bureau of Prisons that Defendant be designated to a facility in Minnesota in order to be close to his family, or alternatively, be designated to a facility as close to Minnesota as possible. (See Third Am. Sentencing J. at 2 [Doc. No. 34].)

Sampica filed a notice of appeal from his conviction on June 25, 2015 [Doc. No. 24]. He now moves for an emergency stay of his imprisonment and to continue his release pending his appeal.

II. DISCUSSION

As a threshold matter, it appears that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present motion although Defendant has already filed a notice of appeal, "because the statute under which Defendant is claiming relief, 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b), confers limited jurisdiction upon district courts to decide this issue." See United States v. Smith, 595 F.Supp.2d 953, 956 (S.D. Iowa 2009) (citing United States v. Estrada, No. 07-10038, 2008 WL 2148762, at *2 (D.S.D. May 21, 2008)).

Turning to the merits of Defendant's motion, § 3143(b)(1) provides, in part:

[T]he judicial officer shall order that a person who has been found guilty of an offense and sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and who has filed an appeal or a petition for a writ of certiorari, be detained, unless the judicial officer finds -
(A) by clear and convincing evidence that the person is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of any other person or ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.