Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 990 Filed 05/21/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 4744

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 990 Filed 05/21/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 4745

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 990 Filed 05/21/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 4746

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 990 Filed 05/21/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 4747

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 990 Filed 05/21/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 4748

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 1 of 10 PageID# 4794

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Newport News Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
CARMEN S. MIRANDA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Criminal No. 4:19-cr-47

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
RELEASE FROM CUSTODY
Comes now the United States of America, by counsel, and offers its response in
opposition to defendant Carmen Miranda’s motion for release from custody (Documents 990 and
991). In support of her motion, the defendant cites ongoing medical issues and posits that those
conditions will be better managed if she is released from custody. As explained below, the
government is not confident that the defendant’s medical conditions will be better managed if
she is not in custody and, in any event, she constitutes a danger to the community.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Carmen Miranda and her right hand co-conspirator, Felix Omar Rodriguez-Roig, are both
named in a third superseding indictment issued by the federal grand jury sitting in Newport
News on February 12, 2020 (Document 757). Specifically, they are charged with conspiracy to
distribute and possess with intent to distribute one hundred grams or more of heroin and a
quantity of cocaine, as well as a single count each of use of a communication facility in
furtherance of drug trafficking. Miranda and Rodriguez-Roig are either married or consider
themselves married.
They also worked very closely together to further the drug conspiracy of which they are a
part. They worked as a team to distribute heroin and cocaine in the Warwick Mobile Homes
1

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 2 of 10 PageID# 4795

trailer park in Newport News. This is a neighborhood that the two control with an iron fist,
according to those familiar with their course of dealings in the trailer park. Information obtained
by officers and detectives indicates that residents of the neighborhood are frightened of Miranda
and Rodriguez-Roig.1
As for their involvement in this drug conspiracy, Miranda was intercepted on Courtauthorized Title III telephone intercepts in this case ordering heroin and cocaine from Damarcus
Mackie and Travis Walters, both of whom have pleaded guilty in this case. In all, from 2017 to
2018, Mackie in particular sold Miranda at least 600 to 900 grams of heroin. Oftentimes,
Miranda and Rodriguez-Roig would show up together to drug deals with Mackie or Walters.
Miranda would usually be the one to make the arrangements and drive to these meetings, but it
was Rodriguez-Roig who would actually get out of the car and complete the transaction with
Mackie or Walters. For example, the investigative team observed this exact scenario play out on
October 10, 2018 at the Warwick Mobile Homes trailer park. Miranda’s typical order from
Mackie or Walters was 10 grams of heroin and 14 grams of cocaine. Over the course of the Title
III intercept investigation, Miranda was intercepted in drug-pertinent calls and texts 233 times
and Rodriguez was intercepted on drug-pertinent calls and texts 12 times, consistent with each
one’s role as described above.
Of note, Miranda has been suffering with medical complications for years, a fact to which
her counsel alluded at her detention hearing. The investigation in this case likewise confirmed
this. In late October 2018, Miranda was hospitalized and required surgery. During her stay in
the hospital, she was intercepted on the Title III placing orders for heroin with Travis Walters.
Specifically, on October 22, 2018 Miranda contacted Walters and ordered 5 grams of heroin.
1

Residents would have good reason to be afraid of this pair. The Court will recall that
Rodriguez-Roig has a lengthy criminal history involving violent felony offenses.
2

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 3 of 10 PageID# 4796

She told Walters that she was at Riverside Hospital, would be there for a few days, but would be
sending Rodriguez-Roig out to the hospital parking lot to take delivery of the heroin. Later that
day, Walters texted Miranda “here.” Walters followed up with other text messages, but Miranda
did not reply for a few hours. When she did, she explained to Walters that she had been in
surgery.
The very next morning, October 23, 2018, still in the hospital, Miranda texted Walters to
order 10 grams of heroin. Miranda again reminded Walters that it would be Rodriguez-Roig
who would pick the drugs up in the hospital parking lot on her behalf. Later that morning,
Walters confirmed to Miranda that he had met Rodriguez-Roig in the hospital parking lot,
texting Miranda “I got him.”
Miranda exercises dominion and control over at least four trailers in the Warwick Mobile
Homes trailer park. When she was arrested on February 25, 2020, she was found at a trailer
within that neighborhood, a trailer in which her mother was residing, as well. Prior to Miranda’s
arrest, the Newport News Police Department had received tips and complaints about Miranda
and Rodriguez-Roig distributing drugs in the Warwick Mobile Homes trailer park.
STANDARDS GOVERNING
Authority to review bond determinations can be found in two statutes, 18 U.S.C. §
3142(f)(2) and 18 U.S.C. § 3145. The controlling statute depends on the circumstances
prompting review. Where a defendant can show that “information exists that was not known to
the movant at the time of the hearing and that has a material bearing on the issue” of detention or
release, the Magistrate Judge may reopen the detention hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2).
Absent such newly discovered information, the defendant must seek review by the District Court
under 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b).

3

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 4 of 10 PageID# 4797

ARGUMENT
As a threshold issue, it is a close call as to whether there have been any changed
circumstances in this case that would warrant reopening under § 3142(f)(2), as opposed to
review under § 3145(b). The defendant cites pre-existing medical conditions in support of her
motion, medical conditions that the undersigned recalls her raising at her detention hearing.
Even if the defendant has raised changed circumstances, it is far from certain whether she will be
better off out of custody. Even analyzing her continued detention under § 3142(f)(2), the Court
should still consider whether the circumstances the defense cites “will reasonably assure…the
safety of any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2). As explained below,
the defendant’s medical issues do not abate the danger she poses to the community.
The information available suggests that the defendant’s diabetes was ill-managed even
before she ever went into custody. As the Court may be aware, one long-term complication from
diabetes is poor circulation, which can become bad enough that it causes the patient to need toe,
foot, and even leg amputations. Miranda’s, in particular, was bad enough that she had to have a
toe removed.2 Though the defendant does not discuss this in her motion, such extreme
complications from diabetes usually result from mismanagement of the disease, including having
consistently elevated blood sugars and A1Cs. A patient’s A1C shows the patient’s overall blood
sugar control over the course of the previous three months. For diabetics, the goal is to have an
A1C reading under 7.0. Nondiabetics have A1C readings under 5.7. See generally
Understanding A1C, American Diabetes Association (May 26, 2020),

2

The pretrial services report indicates that the defendant needed to have her whole foot removed.
The defendant’s motion confirms that it was her toe, rather than her whole foot, that was
amputated.
4

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 5 of 10 PageID# 4798

https://www.diabetes.org/a1c. The reality is that the defendant’s diabetes complications have not
arisen all of a sudden.
Diabetes complications such as circulation and vision issues result from long-term
damage that the disease has done. They are not the result of just a few months’ worth of high
blood sugar. Moreover, once things like diabetic neuropathy (nerve damage) or retinopathy (eye
damage) are present, they can be managed, but they are not going away. See generally Eye
Complications, American Diabetes Association (May 26, 2020), https://www.diabetes.org/
diabetes/complications/eye-complications; Foot Complications, American Diabetes Association
(May 26, 2020), https://www.diabetes.org/diabetes/complications/foot-complications. Releasing
the defendant will take her out of a controlled environment to a completely uncontrolled
environment and her supervising probation officer will not also serve as her endocrinologist and
dietician.3 Even an opportunity to see a doctor of her choosing outside the jail will be of very
limited value if the defendant does not take care of herself once she leaves the doctor’s office.
Indeed, the lion’s share of diabetes management and control is done outside of medical visits,
including regularly checking one’s blood sugar, taking insulin as appropriate, prioritizing
exercise, and eating a suitable diet. If the defendant’s past performance is any indicator of the
future, it seems she is likely to continue to mismanage her diabetes when left to her own devices,
just as she did before she was arrested in this case.
In any event, the drug conspiracy charge pending against the defendant carries a
presumption against bond and, even if there were not such a presumption, the defendant is a
danger to the community. As the Court will recall from the March 2, 2020 detention hearing, the
defendant and her husband and co-defendant Felix Omar Rodriguez-Roig operated as a unit in
3

Endocrinologists are the specialists who treat diabetes patients, as diabetes is an endocrine
disorder.
5

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 6 of 10 PageID# 4799

the Warwick Mobile Homes trailer park. The undersigned recalls some mention at the detention
hearing of having the defendant’s mother serve as a third party custodian. When the defendant
was arrested, her mother was living with her at the Warwick Mobile Homes trailer park.
Residents of the trailer park have reported to law enforcement that they are afraid of the
defendant and Rodriguez-Roig. Indeed, the defendant’s nickname around the trailer park is
Griselda Blanco, a reference to the notorious and violent Miami-based drug trafficker from the
1980s.
Both the pretrial services report and this Court’s March 2, 2020 order of detention cite the
lack of a suitable third party custodian as a factor weighing in favor of detention (Document 816,
p. 3; Document 993, p. 3). In her motion for release, the defendant does nothing to address or
alleviate these concerns. The defendant instead relies on the vague assurance that she “has
family members who reside locally and who are willing and able to assist her under any and all
conditions placed on them by this Court” (Document 991, p. 3). The Court should be especially
leery of releasing a defendant with no real release plan.4
As noted, the defendant and Rodriguez-Roig operated as a unit when engaging in drug
trafficking. The investigation revealed that, in general, the defendant communicated with
sources of supply and most customers. The defendant and Rodriguez-Roig would often drive to
drug transactions together, with Rodriguez-Roig being the one that often had the hand-to-hand
interactions with sources and customers. It makes sense that residents of the Warwick Mobile
Homes trailer park are frightened of the defendant and her husband. Rodriguez-Roig has a very
lengthy criminal history, which includes convictions for crimes of violence. The problem with
releasing the defendant and waiting to see if she returns to her pre-arrest ways is that the Court
4

To the extent the defendant would offer a release plan for the first time in a reply brief, the
government notes that doing so would deny it any opportunity to respond to the release plan.
6

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 7 of 10 PageID# 4800

and its probation officer are unlikely ever to receive word that the defendant and her associates
are back to engaging in intimidation in the trailer park. After all, fear is an effective tool to keep
witnesses from speaking out.
Rodriguez-Roig was not the only “runner” the defendant had. Indeed, during a February
21, 2020 controlled purchase of heroin conducted in this case, the defendant dealt with the
purchaser over the phone, but directed a second runner to conduct the transaction itself with the
purchaser. That transaction took place out of one of the trailers the defendant controlled within
the Warwick Mobile Homes trailer park.
Perhaps even more troubling for a defendant who seeks release for medical reasons is the
fact that this defendant has never let her medical conditions slow down her drug dealing. As
described in the fact section above, the defendant was ordering heroin from Travis Walters while
she was in the hospital and just hours before she went into surgery. The next morning, still
recovering from surgery, she doubled her heroin order and sent Rodriguez-Roig out to the
hospital parking lot to take delivery of the drugs. Though Rodriguez-Roig has been charged and
detained, the same cannot be said of all of the defendant’s runners and drug associates in and
around the Warwick Mobile Homes trailer park. Given this information, not only is the
defendant a danger to the community, the medical-related information she presents in her motion
does not constitute “information…that has a material bearing on the issue of whether there are
conditions of release that will reasonably assure…the safety of any other person and the
community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2). Her lack of legitimate employment in the months leading
up to her arrest is also cause for concern.
The defendant also makes a reference to the coronavirus as a factor supporting her
release. As the defendant notes in her motion, she is presently being held at Western Tidewater

7

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 8 of 10 PageID# 4801

Regional Jail. So far, Western Tidewater has had a single officer test positive for the
coronavirus. Coronavirus Update, Western Tidewater Regional Jail (May 26, 2020),
https://www.wtrj.org/. That officer tested positive seven days after he last worked at the jail.
After the positive test, the jail immediately re-screened and medically assessed all inmates in the
area where the officer was assigned. None of the inmates were found to be symptomatic and
none of the staff with whom the officer worked tested positive. The jail also reported the
situation to the Health Department, which, after an assessment, found that there was a low risk
that others had been exposed in the jail. The staff at the jail continue to use masks and protective
equipment and those entering the facility are subject to screening and temperature checks. The
jail has also limited movement within its confines. Merely speculating that the coronavirus may
infect the jail’s inmates at some future point should be insufficient grounds for release. See, e.g.,
United States v. Williams, No. 13-544, 2020 WL 1434130, at *3 (D.Md. Mar. 24,2020) (“[t]he
existence of the present pandemic, without more, is not tantamount to a ‘get out of jail free’
card”); United States v. Martin, No. 1:19-cr-140, 2020 WL 1274857, at *4 (D.Md. Mar. 17,
2020) (denying release for a defendant with asthma, high blood pressure, and diabetes).
The defendant’s motion makes mention of 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i), the provision covering
temporary release from pretrial detention. Section 3142(i) is the code section that allows
defendants detained pending trial to be released for a few hours for a compelling purpose—to
attend a funeral, for example. To the extent the defendant seeks release for a few hours to go to
an important medical appointment, where the same treatment or examination cannot be brought
to her in the jail, the government will certainly consider and respond to those specific motions
based on the particular circumstances presented. For the purposes of this motion, though, the
defendant does not seem to be seeking temporary release under § 3142(i), rather she seems to be

8

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 9 of 10 PageID# 4802

seeking a blanket reopening or review of the detention hearing under either § 3142(f)(2) or §
3145(b).
For the reasons articulated at the defendant’s original detention hearing, as well as those
set forth herein, the government respectfully urges the Court to deny the defendant’s motion.

Respectfully submitted,
G. ZACHARY TERWILLIGER
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:

___/s/ Kevin Hudson_
Kevin Hudson
Assistant United States Attorney
Virginia State Bar No. 81420
Attorney for the United States
721 Lakefront Commons, Suite 300
Newport News, VA 23606
Office Number: (757) 591-4000
Facsimile Number: (757) 591-0866
Email Address: kevin.hudson@usdoj.gov

9

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1002 Filed 05/26/20 Page 10 of 10 PageID# 4803

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 26th day of May 2020, I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notification
of the filing (NEF) to all counsel of record.

By:

__/s/ Kevin Hudson
Kevin Hudson
Assistant United States Attorney
Virginia State Bar No. 81420
Attorney for the United States
721 Lakefront Commons, Suite 300
Newport News, VA 23606
Office Number: (757) 591-4000
Facsimile Number: (757) 591-0866
Email Address: kevin.hudson@usdoj.gov

10

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1013 Filed 05/29/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 4900

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1013 Filed 05/29/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 4901

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1013 Filed 05/29/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 4902

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1013 Filed 05/29/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 4903

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1013 Filed 05/29/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 4904

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1023 Filed 06/10/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID# 4973

United States District Court
for the

Eastern District of Virginia
United States of America
V.

Case No. 4:19cr47-044
Carmen Suhev Miranda

Defendant

ORDER SETTING CONDITIONS OF RELEASE

IT IS ORDERED that the defendant's release is subject to these conditions:
(1)

(2)

The defendant must not violate federal, state, or local law while on release.

The defendant must cooperate in the collection ofa DNA sample if it is audiorized by 42 U.S.C.
§ 14135a.

(3)

(4)

The defendant must advise the court or the pretrial services ojfEce or supervising ofhcer in writing before
making any change ofresidence or telephone number.

The defendant must ^pear in court as required and, if convicted, must surrender as directed to serve a
sentence that the court may impose.

The defendant must appear at:

U.S. District Court. Norfolk. Virginia
Place

on

June 16.2020 at 2:30 p.m.
Date and Time

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant be released on condition that:

(v^)

(5)

(v^)

(6)

The defendant promises to appear in court as required and surrender to serve sentence imposed.
The defendant executes a fS2.0001 Unsecured Bond binding the defendant to pay to the United States for
FTA.

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1023 Filed 06/10/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID# 4974

AOJ99gJRey;J2/n)_Additro Conditions ofRelease

Ppy 2 of3

ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF RELEASE

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant*s release is subject to the conditions marked below:
(^) (6)

The defendant is placed in die custoffy of
Person or organization
Nilda Rodriguez Miranda
Address(only(fabovej
vehm orsptdattim)
City and state

Tel. No.

who agrees to(a)supervise the defendant,(b)use every effort to assure the defendant's appearance at all court proceedings,and(c)notify the court
immediately ifthe defendant violates a condition ofrelease or is no longer in the custodian's custody.

Signed: 0'Q^(ucS\' QCmto£an
CvstoAan

(^) (7)

\)

u>lt
Dais
'
Date

*

The defendant must:

('^) (a) submit to supervision by and report for supervision to the

United States Probation Office

telephone number
no later than Today
( )(b) continue or actively seek employment
(^) (c) surrender any passport to: U.S. Probation
(>^) (d) not obtain a passport or other international travel document.

{^) (e) abide by the following restrictions on personal association, residence, or travel: restricted to the state of Virginia, unless nrior

aonroval received from Probation

^

(^) (f) avoid all contact,directfy or indirectly, wifo any person who is or may be a victim or witness in the investigation or prosecution,
including: all codefendants

( )(^ maintain residence at a halfway house or communify corrections center, as the pretrial services office or siqiervising officer considers
necessary.

(h) not possess a firearm, destructive device, or other weapon.

(^) (0 not use alcohol( )at all( )excessively.
(^) 0) iiot use or unlawfully possess a narcotic drug or other controlled substances defined in 21 U.S.C.§ 802,unless prescribed by a licensed
medical practitioner.
(«^) 00 submit to testing for a prohibited substance ifrequired by the pretrial services office or supervising officer. Testing may be used with
random fiequen^ and m^include urine testing,the wearing ofa sweat patch, a remote alcohol testing system,and/or any form of
prohibited substance screening or testing. The defendant must not obstruct attemptto obstruct,or tanqier wifo the efficiency and accuracy
ofprohibited substance screening or testing.

(^) (1) participate in a program ofinpatient or ouq)atient substance abuse therapy and counseling ifdirected fay the pretrial services office or
supervising officer.

(^) (m) participate in one ofthe following location restriction programs and comply with its requirements as directed.
(^) (i) Curfew. You are restricted to vour residence every day
from 8t00 pm to 6:00 am.or( )as
directed by the pretrial services office or supervising officer, or
( )(ii) Home Detention. You are restricted to your residence at all times except for employment; education;religious services;
medical,substance abuse,or mental health treatment; attoroqr visits; court tppearances; court-ordered obligations;or ofoer activities
approved in advance by foe pretrial services office or supervising office^ or
( )(Hi) Home Incarceration. You are restricted to 24-hour-a-day lode-down at your residence except for medical necessities and court
appearances or other activities specifically approved by foe court
(^) (n) submit to location monitoring as directed by foe pretrial services office or supervising officer and comply wifo all offoe program
requirements and instructions provided.

(^) You must pay all or part offoe cost offoe program based on your ability to pay as determined by foe pretrial services office or
supervising officer.

(✓) (o) report as soon as possible, to foe pretrial services office or supervising officer, every contact wifo law enforcement personnel, including
arrests, questioning,or traffic stops.

(p)
(q)
(r)
V) (s)

maintain residence at the home ofNilda Rodriguez Miranda fdauehter^ in Suffolk. VA.
submit to electronic monitoring vwth GPS with timeouts as directed bv Probation, at the expense ofthe defendant.
undergo substance abuse testing and treatment at foe exoense ofthe defendant as directed bv Probaton.
refrain from travel to Newport News Mobile Home Park and within a 10-mile radius of Warwick Mobile Home Park,except for attending

appointments wifo her attoroev.
(t) follow all directions ofphvsicians/healthcare providers
)(u)
)(V)
)(w)
)(X)
)(y)
) iz)

 Case 4:19-cr-00047-DJN-LRL Document 1023 Filed 06/10/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID# 4975

ADVICE OF PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS
TO THE DEFENDANT:

YOU ARE ADVISED OF THE FOLLOWING PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS:

Violating any ofthe foregoing conditions ofrelease may result in the immediate issuance ofa warrant for your arrest, a
revocation of your release, an order ofdetention,a forfeiture ofany bond,and a prosecution for contempt ofcourt and could result in
imprisonment, a fine,or both.
While on release, if you commit a federal felony offense the punishment is an additional prison term of not more than ten years

and for a federal misdemeanor offense the punishment is an additional prison term ofnot more than one year. This sentence will be
consecutive (i.e., in addition to)to any other sentence you receive.

It is a crime punishable by up to ten years in prison, and a $250,000 fine, or both,to: obstruct a criminal investigation;
tamper with a witness, victim, or informant; retaliate or attempt to retaliate against a witness, victim,or informant or intimidate or
attempt to intimidate a witness, victim,juror,informant,or officer ofthe court. The penalties for tampering, retaliation, or
intimidation are significantly more serious ifthey involve a killing or attempted killing.
11^ after release, you knowingly foil to ^pear as the conditions ofrelease require, or to surrender to serve a sentence,
you may be prosecuted for fidling to appear or surrender and additional punishment may be imposed. If you are convicted of:
(1) an offense punishable by death,life imprisonment,or imprisonment for a teim offifteen years or more -you will be fined
not more than $250,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years,or both;
(2) an offense punishable by imprisonment for a term offive years or more, but less than fifteen years—you will be fined not
more than $250,000 or imprisoned for not more than five years,or both;
(3) any other felony- you will be fined not more than $250,000 or imprisoned not more than two years,or both;
(4) a misdemeanor — you will be fined not more than $100,000 or imprisoned not more than one year,or both.
A term ofimprisonment imposed for foilure to appear or surrender will be consecutive to any other sentence you receive. In
addition, a failure to appear or surrender may result in the forfeiture ofany bond posted.

Acknowledgment of the Defendant
I acknowledge that I am the defendant in this case and that I am aware ofthe conditions ofrelease. I promise to obey all
conditions ofrelease,to appear as directed, and surrender to serve any sentence imposed. I am aware ofthe penalties and sanctions
set forth above.

tsSignatun

OtyattdSteae

Directions to the United States Marshal

( ) The defendant is ORDERED released after processing.

(/) The United States marshal is ORDERED to keep the defendant in custody until notified by the clerk orjudge that the
defendant has posted bond and/or complied with all other conditions for release. Ifstill in custody,the defendant must be

producet^efore the appropriatejudge at the time and place specified.
Date:

01 i

yfU)

I^

jA
Unitoci Siatss i'viagistrate Judge
Judielal Oncer'sSipuOttn

Douglas E. Miller. U.S. Magistrate Judge
Printed name and tide

DISTRIBUTION: COURT

DEFENDANT

PRETRIAL SERVICE

U.S.ATTORNEY

U.S. MARSHAL