Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Edwards

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

October 20, 2017

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Sanyani Edwards, Defendant.

          ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT

          ARTHUR J. TARNOW, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On July 20, 2013, a jury convicted Defendant Sanyani Edwards of Health Care Fraud Conspiracy (Count 1), Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substances (Count 11), and Conspiracy to Pay/Receive Healthcare Kickbacks (Count 21). United States of America v. Patel, et al., No. 11-20468-23, (E.D. Mich. 2013). Defendant was scheduled to appear for sentencing on December 6, 2013. Defendant failed to appear for sentencing and the Court issued an arrest warrant on December 9, 2013. Id. at [Dkt. #1065].

         Defendant was arrested on November 3, 2015. The arrest warrant was returned on November 9, 2015. Id. at [Dkt. #1497]. Defendant was detained prior to sentencing.

         On March 4, 2016, the Court held a Sentencing Hearing. At the Sentencing Hearing, the following testimony was given:

MR. NEAL: Mr. Edwards did another obstructive act which was to flee in advance of his sentencing. In fact, he cut the tether off of his leg the day of sentencing and fled without any warning to his counsel or to the courts.
THE COURT: Isn't that a felony?
MR. NEAL: It is, your Honor.
THE COURT: You can charge him?
MR. NEAL: This is true, your Honor.
THE COURT: It would be automatic time consecutive?
MR. NEAL: This is absolutely true. I would just note that the guidelines do have a provision under Section 3C1.1 concerning obstructive conduct where they note that as an example of obstructive conduct the guidelines note that escaping or attempting to escape before custody or from custody before trial or sentencing or willfully failing to appear as ordered for a judicial proceeding. The Government would simply submit Mr. Edwards did that here and I think the Court, in the interest of judicial economy, should --
THE COURT: Don't -- please don't make that argument. We are talking about a man's life and it may only be one month or one year and so on and I'm supposed to save the court's time by sending him to prison for a longer period of time without making you convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt? That's --
MR. NEAL: Judge, the Court can make the finding by a preponderance of the evidence. The facts are fairly clear. He did not show up for sentencing. He was not present. He was on the lam for two years living under an assumed name.
THE COURT: I hope he enjoyed it because he is not going to be --you are not going to get your wish getting probation or time served, Mr. Edwards. If they want to enhance your sentence for your escaping or fleeing, Congress has set a law that makes it a ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.