United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
October 13, 2005.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
EARNEST D'MARCO JOHNSON, Defendant.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MICHAEL REAGAN, District Judge
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
Before this Court is Defendant Earnest D'Marco Johnson's
"Motion for Government to Secure Defendant's Presence at
Sentencing Hearing(s)" (Doc. 265). Therein, counsel for Johnson
argues that Johnson's presence at the Paladino hearing
(scheduled for December 2, 2005) is necessary in order for the
Court to adequately determine whether a sentencing departure is
warranted. This Court disagrees. In making a Paladino
determination, "the District Court should obtain the views of
counsel, at least in writing, but need not require the presence
of the Defendant." United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471,
484 (7th Cir. 2005) (emphasis added). The Court will consider
any written affidavits that Johnson submits regarding this
matter. Johnson's physical presence at the Paladino hearing,
however, is unnecessary. Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES
Johnson's motion (Doc. 265).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.