Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

07-014 - USA v. Qualls

Download Files


Document in Context
07-014 - USA v. Qualls
May 19, 2008
PDF | More
ORDER DENYING 66 Motion to Dismiss as to Thomas W. Qualls --- Defendant filed the instant motion seeking dismissal of Counts 16 and 17 as duplicitous. Alternatively, Defendant seeks an order, pursuant to Rule 7(f), requiring the government to provide him with a bill of particulars identifying each financial transaction that supports Counts 16 and 17. Additionally, Defendant challenges, on Sixth Amendment grounds, the government's reliance on a certification to authenticate the business records of a foreign entity and seeks an order either (i) requiring the government to produce a live witness to authenticate the business records or (ii) permitting Defendant to depose an appropriate employee pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 15. The government has opposed the motion in its entirety. For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, Defendant's motion is denied in all respects. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 05/19/08. (Irizarry, Dora)
June 6, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER RE: Defendant's Objections to PSR as to Thomas W. Qualls -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN OPINION AND ORDER, defendant's objections to the Presentence Report are overruled. Defendant's conduct warrants a four-point offense level commodities trading adviser enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(18), a two-point offense level sophisticated means enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(10), a four-point leadership role enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a), and a 14-point offense level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(H). Additionally, the Court finds that application of the 2013 Guidelines Manual does not violate the ex post facto clause in this case and that a Fatico hearing to adduce further evidence regarding Defendant's mental capacity is unwarranted. Defendant's other arguments in support of a downward variance are without merit. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 6/6/2014. (Irizarry, Dora)
March 27, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER denying 264 Motion for Recusal as to Thomas W. Qualls (1) --- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN SUMMARY ORDER, Petitioner's motion for recusal is denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Summary order to pro se Petitioner. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/27/2018. (Irizarry, Dora)