Parties’ Joint Memorandum Pursuant to Local Rule 116.5(b)

7/26/2019 Parties Joint Memorandum Pursuant to Local Rule 116.5(b)

1/4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. )) Criminal No. 15-cr-30018-MGM

ALEXANDER CICCOLO, )

a/k/a Ali Al Amriki, )

Defendant. )

Parties Joint Memorandum Pursuant to Local Rule 116.5(b)

The United States of America, by Carmen M. Ortiz, United States Attorney for the

District of Massachusetts, and counsel for Alexander Ciccolo, David Hoose, Esq., hereby file

their joint memorandum pursuant to Local Rule 116.5(b):

1. The government has produced automatic discovery. To date, the government has

produced to the defendant discovery in 1378 pages, along with disks and a hard drive of media

and other evidence.

2. The government will provide discovery in response to any future request

according to the Local Rules and pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, including

any supplemental discovery if any additional materials are obtained.

3. The Court has ordered that the deadline for the defendant to file discovery

requests be postponed until after the government decides whether to seek additional charges

against him.

4. A protective order has been agreed to by the parties and entered by the Court. See

Docket No. 41.

Case 3:15-cr-30018-MGM Document 80 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 3


2/4

2

5. The parties agree that the scheduling of Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b) motions at this

time is premature.

6. The parties agree that expert witness disclosures are premature. Concerning the

pending firearms and assault charges, the government will call a firearms expert to discuss the

firearms seized from the defendant.

7. The defendant requests 30 additional days to notify the government whether he

will pursue a defense of insanity, public authority, and/or alibi.

8.

The parties agree that all of the time from May 24, 2016 to the date of the next

status conference should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7). The

parties agree that the ends of justice served by excluding the time from the Speedy Trial Act,

outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial. The parties agree that

this Speedy Trial Act exclusion is appropriate in order to allow: (1) the government time to

consider presenting a superseding indictment to the grand jury that would significantly alter the

prosecution and defense of the case, (2) defense counsel to review the discovery with the

defendant, and (3) the defendant to consider his options in light of the evidence. A proposed

order of excludable delay is attached.

9. The parties have not yet engaged in plea discussions. The estimated length of

trial is 4 weeks.

10. The parties recommend that an additional interim status conference be scheduled

during the week of July 11, 2016.



3/4

3

Respectfully submitted,

CARMEN M. ORTIZ

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: /s/ Deepika B. Shukla

KEVIN OREGAN (678347)DEEPIKA B. SHUKLA (NY4584009, CT434931)

Assistant United States Attorney

300 State Street, Suite 230

Springfield, MA 01105413-785-0237

[email protected]

By: /s/ David Hoose

DAVID HOOSE, Esq.

Attorney for Alexander Ciccolo

Certificate of Service

June 7, 2016

I hereby certify that this document filed through the ECF system will be sentelectronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF).

/s/ Deepika B. ShuklaDeepika B. Shukla

Assistant United States Attorney

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


4/4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. )) Criminal No. 15-cr-30018-MGM

ALEXANDER CICCOLO, )

a/k/a Ali Al Amriki, )

Defendant. )

[PROPOSED] ORDER OF EXCLUDABLE DELAY

June ____, 2016

The government has made a motion for an order of excludable delay that has been

assented to by the defendant.

The Court finds that the time from May 24, 2016 until the date of the next status

conference, July _____, 2016, is excludable from the calculation of the time within which the

trial must begin pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act.

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance to the date of

the next status conference, July _____, 2016, and excluding this time from the calculation of the

time within which the trial must begin outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant

in a speedy trial pursuant to 18 U.S.C. '3161(h)(7)(A) and Local Rule 112.2. The exclusion

will serve the ends of justice because it will allow the government time to consider bringing

additional charges, defense counsel time to review the voluminous discovery produced to date

and share it with the defendant, and for the defendant to consider his options in light of the

evidence.

______________________

Katherine A. Robertson

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cr-30018-MGM Document 80-1 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 1

Parties’ Joint Memorandum Pursuant to Local Rule 116.5(b)

Documents

Transcript of Parties’ Joint Memorandum Pursuant to Local Rule 116.5(b)