USA v. Bojorquez-Espinoza
| Arizona District Court | |
| Case #: | 4:23-cr-00462 |
| Case Filed: | Apr 05, 2023 |
| Last checked: Friday May 05, 2023 1:04 AM MST |
|
Defendant
Enrique Bojorquez-Espinoza (1)
|
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
USA
|
Represented By
|
| Docket last updated: 05/05/2023 1:40 AM MST |
| Monday, March 06, 2023 | ||
| Arrest of Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza on 3/6/2023. (ARS) *Modified on 3/13/2023 reflect correct name of defendant (LML). [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | ||
| Tuesday, March 07, 2023 | ||
| 1 | 1
COMPLAINT as to Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza. (ARS) Modified on 3/13/2023 reflect correct name of defendant (LML). [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR]
|
|
| Wednesday, March 08, 2023 | ||
| 2 | 2 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge D Thomas Ferraro: Initial Appearance as to *Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza held on 3/8/2023. Defendant(s) state true name to be the same. Government's motion for detention and request for continuance of the Detention Hearing is granted. Defendant(s) temporarily detained in the custody of the U.S. Marshal. Interpreter required for *Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza (1) Spanish. An attorney is appointed to represent the defendant. In the presence of government and defense counsel, the Court orally advises the government of their Brady obligation. Written order to follow. Appearances : AUSA David Zipps (duty) for the Government, CJA Attorney Tamara Mulembo (specially appearing) for defendant. Defendant is present and in custody. Spanish Interpreter Liliana Nido-Zawacki assists defendant. Detention Hearing set for 3/10/2023 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Leslie A Bowman. Preliminary Hearing set for 3/10/2023 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Leslie A Bowman. Hearing held 2:00 pm to 2:31 pm. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (REC) Modified on 3/13/2023 reflect correct name of defendant (LML). [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | |
| 3 | 3 ORDER: Under federal law, including Rule 5(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and all applicable decisions from the Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit interpreting Brady , the government has a continuing obligation to produce all information or evidence known to the government relating to guilt or punishment that might reasonably be considered favorable to the defendant's case, even if the evidence is not admissible so long as it is reasonably likely to lead to admissible evidence. See United States v. Price , 566 F.3d 900,913 n.14 (9th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the court orders the government to produce to the defendant in a timely manner all such information or evidence. Information or evidence may be favorable to a defendant's case if it either may help bolster the defendant's case or impeach a prosecutor's witness or other government evidence. If doubt exists, it should be resolved in favor of the defendant with full disclosure being made. If the government believes that a required disclosure would compromise witness safety, victim rights, national security, a sensitive law-enforcement technique, or any other substantial government interest, the government may apply to the Court for a modification of the requirements of this Disclosure Order, which may include in camera review and/or withholding or subjecting to a protective order all or part of the information. This Disclosure Order is entered under Rule 5(f) and does not relieve any party in this matter of any other discovery obligation. The consequences for violating either this Disclosure Order or the government's obligations under Brady include, but are not limited to, the following: contempt, sanction, referral to a disciplinary authority, adverse jury instruction, exclusion of evidence, and dismissal of charges. Nothing in this Disclosure Order enlarges or diminishes the government's obligation to disclose information and evidence to a defendant under Brady , as interpreted and applied under Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent. As the Supreme Court noted, "the government violates the Constitution's Due Process Clause 'if it withholds evidence that is favorable to the defense and material to the defendant's guilt or punishment." ' Turner v. United States , 137 S. Ct. 1885, 1888 (2017), quoting Smith v. Cain , 565 U.S. 73, 75 (2012). Ordered by Magistrate Judge D Thomas Ferraro.(REC)(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no pdf document associated with this entry.) [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | |
| 4 | 4 MINUTE ORDER: Added appointed attorney Matthew John McGuire (CJA) for *Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (JAM) *Modified on 3/13/2023 reflect correct name of defendant (LML). [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | |
| Friday, March 10, 2023 | ||
| 6 | 6 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Leslie A Bowman: Preliminary Hearing waived and Status Conference held on 3/10/2023 re: Detention Hearing RESET, as to Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza. Defense counsel makes a record that Defendant's TRUE NAME is as reflected within the Complaint, Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza; the Docket shall be amended to reflect the Defendant's true name. The Detention Hearing is ordered reset as reflected below and Defendant to remain temporarily detained pending reset hearing. Pretrial Services shall interview the Defendant. Preliminary Hearing waived. Finding: Defendant held to answer before District Court. Interpreter NOT required for Defendant: N/A - ENGLISH. Appearances : AUSA Craig Russell present as AUSA on duty for the Government. CJA Attorney Matthew McGuire present for Defendant. Defendant is present and in custody. Detention Hearing reset to 3/16/2023 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich. Hearing held 10:36 AM to 11:12 AM. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (LML) [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | |
| Thursday, March 16, 2023 | ||
| 8 | 8 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich: Detention Hearing as to Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza submitted on 3/16/2023. Pretrial Services recommends detention and the Government concurs. Defense counsel submits to the Pretrial Services report at this time. Defendant ordered detained pending trial. Appearances : AUSA Liza Granoff, attorney on duty for the Government, CJA Attorney Matthew McGuire for defendant. Defendant is present and in custody. Hearing held 10:34 AM to 10:50 AM. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (SGG) [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | |
| 9 | 9 ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL as to Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza. I conclude that the following facts require the detention of the defendant pending trial in this case. Findings of Fact and Statement of Reasons: (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense. (2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. (3) Defendant is a citizen of another country, illegally in the United States of America. (4) Defendant does not have sufficient ties to the community. (5) The reports from Pretrial Services Agency are adopted as the further findings of this Magistrate Judge. Directions Regarding Detention: The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his/her designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J. Markovich on 3/16/2023. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (SGG) [4:23-mj-08645-N/A-JR] | |
| Wednesday, April 05, 2023 | ||
| 10 | 10
INDICTMENT as to Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza (1) count(s) 1. Arraignment set for 4/28/2023 at 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge D Thomas Ferraro. ***NOTICE: Counsel is advised as to ARRAIGNMENT set, TRIAL date is 6/06/2023 at 9:30 AM, and PLEA DEADLINE is 5/19/2023.
NOTE: The process for waiving defendants appearance at Arraignment has changed. There is no longer a need to file a Notice of Intent to File Waiver of Defendants Appearance. Instead, signed appearance waivers may be electronically filed using the Waiver of Defendants Presence at Arraignment and Acknowledgement of Trial Date event. The event is located under Criminal Event Categories: Other Filings/Waivers. The signed Waiver must be filed no later than 12:00 PM the business day prior to the scheduled arraignment.
Failure of defense counsel to file a timely waiver (or a timely motion to continue) may result in the reappointment of defense counsel. (JAM)
|
|
| 11 | 11
SEALED UNREDACTED INDICTMENT as to Enrique Bojorquez Espinoza. (JAM)
|
|