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. Bravata

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

May 14, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN BRAVATA, Defendant.

          ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO RECUSE JUDGE

          PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Petitioner was convicted in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, after a 39 day trial, on 14 counts of aiding and abetting wire fraud in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §§1343 and 2. The jury also convicted him of conspiring with his son Antonio Bravata to commit fire fraud.

         The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed their convictions and John Bravata's sentence. United States v. Bravata, 636 Fed. App'x. 277 (2016) (6th Cir., Jan. 22, 2016). The Court of Appeals denied the Bravatas' renewed Motion for New Trial:

We may quickly disperse of defendants' appeal of the denial of their renewed motion for a new trial. Their new evidence -Juror #4's affidavit - was not material. As we explained above, the affidavit mirrored the trial transcript and the court's explanation of the relevant communications.

Id. 21.

         On October 3, 3016, the Supreme Court denied John Bravata's petition for writ of certiorari; 137 S.Ct. 82. On November 28, 2016, the Supreme Court denied John Bravata's petition for rehearing. 137 S.Ct. 541.

         On December 18, 2017, the Sixth Circuit denied Defendant John Bravata's motion 'to recall the February 16, 2016 mandate in United States v. Bravata, 636 Fed.Appx. 277 (6th Cir. 2016), in which the Court affirmed the denial of his motion for a new trial." The Court of Appeals added:

He has also moved the district court to vacate his sentence, challenging, in part, counsel's continued representation despite her withdrawal in this court, and he may appeal any adverse decision on that motion.

Id.

         On August 18, 2017, Defendant filed a "Motion to Recuse Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§144 and 455. The motion seeks to disqualify this Court "from presiding over the Motion of §2255 herein on the grounds that he has personal bias and prejudice against the Petitioner, Bravata, and therefore could not preside with the required degree of detached impartiality." Dkt. #419, Page ID 9177.

         Defendant's Motion to Recuse Judge states, inter alia, that"... the defendant's sentencing guideline was 60-87 months and the presiding Judge Borman enhanced Petitioner to the Maximum 20 year sentence." This was incorrect.

         The Court of Appeals opinion affirming John Bravata's sentence found:

At sentencing, the court varied down significantly from the guidelines range of 324 to 405 months of imprisonment and imposed a 240 months sentence.

United States v. John Bravata, 636 Fed.Appx. 277 (6th Cir. 2016) (January 22, 2016) ...


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.