F. Richard Curtner
Federal Public Defender
FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
550 W. Seventh Avenue, Suite 1600
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907) 271-2277
Sue Ellen Tatter
510 L Street, Suite 306
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907) 277-7171
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CASE NO. xxxxxxxxxxx (HRH)
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) MOTION FOR
) CHANGE OF VENUE
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, )
)
Defendant. )
____________________________________)
COMES NOW THE DEFENDANT, xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, by and through his attorneys, RICH CURTNER, Federal Defender and SUE ELLEN TATTER, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 21(a) and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, moves this court for an order changing venue from Fairbanks to Anchorage, Alaska. This motion is supported by the accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, affidavit of counsel, and exhibits,
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(1)(F), a period of excludable delay may result from the filing/granting/or denying of this motion.
DATED this ____ day of April, 1997.
F. Richard Curtner
Federal Public Defender
FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
550 W. Seventh Avenue, Suite 1600
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907) 271-2277
Sue Ellen Tatter
510 L Street, Suite 306
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907) 277-7171
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CASE NO. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (HRH)
)
Plaintiff, )
) MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
vs. ) MOTION FOR
) CHANGE OF VENUE
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, )
)
Defendant. )
____________________________________)
I. INTRODUCTION
The defendant requests a change of
venue from Fairbanks to Anchorage because prejudicial pretrial publicity in this case has
so infected the potential jurors that a fair and impartial jury would be impossible to
assemble in the Fourth Judicial District.
II. DISCUSSION
THE COURT MUST ORDER A CHANGE OF VENUE WHERE PREJUDICIAL PUBLICITY HAS INFECTED THE POOL OF POTENTIAL JURORS.
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees to each defendant the right to a fair and impartial jury. The jurors need not be totally ignorant of the facts and issues involved, but the "theory of the law is that a juror who has formed an opinion cannot be impartial." Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 155, 8 Otto 145, 25 L.Ed 244 (1879). Where there is a probability that pretrial publicity has prejudiced the pool of potential jurors, the court is required to change the venue to protect the defendant's rights to a fair and impartial trial. Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 81 S.Ct. 1639, 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961)(Irvin); Rideau v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, 83 L.Ct. 1417, 10 L.Ed.2d 633 (1963)(Rideau); Rule 21(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (1). See also, Estes v. Texas, 381 U.S. 532, 85 L.Ct. 1628, 14 L.Ed.2d 543 (1965). Silverthorne v. United States, 400 F.2d 627, 630 (9th Cir. 1968)(Silverthorne);
In this case, the pool of potential
jurors in the Fourth Judicial District may be presumed to be so prejudiced against
defendant Abram xxxxxxx that a change of venue to Anchorage is necessary to ensure him a
fair and impartial jury trial.
A. The Pretrial Publicity is Widespread and Slanted.
Postmistress Agnes Esmailka Wright was
beateny\tfVM5[Tw9Xe:cv@U҆D~w\iv1+B~&%W+
4h5.+B%~&T༼8ωQS{@K8?j~O%`6U᛭D_28KYp-idc-aI火 ¡Q.wCcq;gCy-%I
m8Ut@6~;eDjdcEV*[w0bpb&+9OGjn.O$\Hy
X`64%jU'Q0Y3k[&yYKw1'uꖰِ-SS|-drx@ds'T
ї^7Y|*|v^nclbDY壎I~vLrm^jx(v@ɖ5tCQbpyIp&aS㟰ϖ9YW8[1mcd@js'߫@조@ݐB;W8