IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
February 5, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
EDWARD R. VRDOLYAK, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
This Court has received, and is in the process of reviewing, the United States' just-filed bulky Sentencing Memorandum and Response to Defendant's Sentencing Submission. In every criminal sentencing this Court's uniform procedure is to advise the parties that after defense counsel's oral submission on behalf of his or her client followed by defendant's exercise of his or her right of allocution, the prosecutor is then given a like opportunity to present the government's position, after which defense counsel and defendant are given the opportunity to reply as to any matters covered in the government response to which it is felt that full coverage has not been provided on behalf of defendant in the first instance. In that way the court has a full presentation before it to assist in the sentencing decision.
In this instance, as already indicated, each side has tendered an extensive written submission. To provide this Court with the equivalent of what has just been described as its standard procedure where oral presentations are involved, it would be prepared to entertain a reply memorandum on defendant's behalf if defense counsel desire to submit one. It is of course recognized that the presently scheduled February 10 sentencing date affords very little leeway for the preparation of such a reply, and if a bit more time were to be requested for that purpose so that the sentencing date would have to be deferred briefly, this Court would be prepared to reschedule that date.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.