Since less than five months have passed since the return of defendant's indictment in this case, the Court concludes that defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial has not been violated. Additionally, since the defendant has failed to show an impairment of her right to a fair trial or enough evidence to infer a retaliatory motive on the part of the government in seeking the indictment, the Court concludes that defendant's Fifth Amendment Due Process rights were not violated. As such, defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment will be denied. The Court will enter an order in accordance with the foregoing of even date herewith.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for an Order Prohibiting the Government from Serving "Notice of Appearance" Forms on Prospective Witnesses and the Government's opposition thereto. Defendant claims that these notices, issued in connection with the investigation and preparation for trial of this case, allegedly give prospective witnesses the erroneous impression that they are required to appear for a pre-trial investigative conference with the United States Attorney's Office. Such was not the case with respect to the defendant's daughter in this case, who refused to appear at the United States Attorney's Office for such a conference.
Upon consideration of defendant's motion, the government's opposition, and the representations contained therein, the Court concludes that this matter is moot and thereby denies the motion. The Government has assured the Court that no additional "Notice of Appearance" forms of the type complained about by the defendant will be served on any prospective witnesses in this case. Government's Memorandum at p. 1. In addition, the defendant has not shown any harm caused by the use of these forms. The government's assurance to stop using the forms in this case grants the defendant's requested relief without the need for judicial intervention.
As a final note, the Court recognizes that the Assistant United States Attorney involved with this case, almost immediately upon receipt of the Defendant's motion, indicated the Office's willingness to "reconsider [its] position in regard to the manner in which [it] express[es] [its] conviction that a citizen . . . has an obligation to cooperate with law enforcement authorities when asked to do so." Government's Memorandum at p. 2. This is strong evidence of his professionalism, candor and intended good faith, and is consistent with the high quality of character and integrity that he has demonstrated repeatedly over the years in appearing before this Court in the trial of complex and hotly contested cases. Moreover, the Court construes the action of Mr. John Karr, in bringing this matter to the Court's attention as also consistent with his reputation for thoroughness and vigorous representation of his clients which the Court respects.
It is, therefore, this 30th day of November, 1983,
ORDERED that defendant's motion be, and the same is hereby, denied.
Upon consideration of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment on Grounds of Sixth and Fifth Amendment Violations, the government's opposition thereto, and the entire record, it is this 30th day of November, 1983 hereby
ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment be, and the same is hereby, denied.