Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#: 39
`
`KARIN J. IMMERGUT, OSB # 96314
`United States Attorney
`District of Oregon
`SCOTT M. KERIN, OSB # 96512
`JANE H. SHOEMAKER, CSB # 125815
`1000 SW Third Avenue, Suite 600
`Portland, Oregon 97204
`Telephone: (503) 727-1000
`Facsimile: (503) 727-1117
`E-mail: Scott.Kerin@usdoj.gov
`Jane.Shoemaker@usdoj.gov
`Attorneys for the United States
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`
`v.
`
`OSCAR FRANCISCO MACIAS-
`OVALLE, et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`CR 08-228-HA
`
`GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO
`DECLARE CASE COMPLEX,
`VACATE CURRENT DATES, AND RE-
`SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS
`CONFERENCE
`
`The United States of America, by and through Karin J. Immergut, United States Attorney
`
`for the District of Oregon, and Scott M. Kerin and Jane H. Shoemaker, Assistant United States
`
`Attorneys, respectfully moves the Court to designate this a complex case, vacate the current
`
`discovery, motions, and trial dates, and schedule a status conference for July 14, 2008, at which
`
`time new dates may be set.
`
`/ / /
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 2 of 8 Page ID#: 40
`
`DEFENSE POSITION
`
`This motion is unopposed by counsel for the defendants who have appeared thus far:
`
`John Ransom, counsel for Oscar Macias-Ovalle; Mark Bailey, counsel for Alejandro Bello-
`
`Cuevas; and Matthew Schindler, counsel for Fernando Macias, Jr. Defendant Angel Ramirez-
`
`Arroyo was arrested in the Northern District of California, and was ordered removed to this
`
`district in May. However, defendant Angel Ramirez-Arroyo has not yet appeared or received
`
`appointed counsel in this district. The remaining two defendants, Artemio Ramirez-Arroyo and
`
`Jaime Contreras-Espinoza, are fugitives.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`This case stems from a long term investigation resulting in six federal indictments: two
`
`“drug indictments” and one “money laundering indictment” were returned in March 2008, and
`
`three “drug indictments,” including this case, were returned in May 2008:
`
`United States v. Jaime Osegera-Gonzalez, et al, CR 08-126-HA (13 defendants);
`
`United States v. Blanca Rosas-Padilla, CR 08-131-HA (1 defendant);1
`
`United States v. Blanca Navarrete-Cuellar, CR-08-127-MO (1 defendant);
`
`United States v. Valeriano Carrillo-Carrillo, et al., CR 08-205-RE (13 defendants);
`
`United States v. Oscar Macias-Ovalle, et al., CR 08-228-HA (6 defendants); and
`
`United States v. Hugo Rodriguez-Bello, et al., CR 08-241-MO (2 defendants).
`
`Each of these cases, except Rodriguez-Bello, is based on overlapping wiretaps approved
`
`by Chief Judge Ancer L. Haggerty between January and April 2008. The initial wiretap covered
`
`Rosas-Padilla was originally assigned to Judge Jones, but was re-assigned to
`1
`Judge Haggerty.
`
`Page 2 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 3 of 8 Page ID#: 41
`
`three telephones, designated target telephones 1-3, or TT1-TT3. Target telephone 1 (TT1) was
`
`known to be used by Mariana Franco Maldonado, who is charged in the Carrillo-Carrillo
`
`indictment. TT2 and TT3 were known to be used by defendants now charged in the Osegera-
`
`Gonzalez case. At the time, it was believed the two groups were all part of a single conspiracy.
`
`However, the known link between the two groups, Jorge Pacheco, was murdered shortly before
`
`the government obtained the first wiretap, and no other link was established during the course of
`
`the electronic surveillance.
`
`Judge Haggerty authorized continued wire interceptions over TT1-TT3 into March 2008,
`
`and authorized interceptions over a second telephone tied to the user of TT2, designated target
`
`telephone 4 (TT4), into March as well. As a result of the interceptions over TT2, TT3, and TT4,
`
`and other investigation, the government sought and obtained the Osegera-Gonzalez, Rosas-
`
`Padilla, and Navarrete-Cuellar indictments in March 2008. The defendants in Osegera-
`
`Gonzalez and Rosas-Padilla are charged with various drug offenses under Title 21. Navarrete-
`
`Cuellar is charged with money laundering and structuring offenses under Title 18 and Title 31.
`
`The government continued wire interceptions over TT1, and spin-off wiretaps over target
`
`telephones identified as TT5, TT6, and ultimately TT7, until May 2008. The users of TT5 and
`
`TT6 were identified, through interceptions over TT1 and other investigation, as suppliers for
`
`Franco-Maldonado: Angel Ramirez-Arroyo, who is charged in this case, was identified as the
`
`primary user of TT5. Jesus Contreras, who is charged in Carrillo-Carrillo, was identified as the
`
`primary user of TT6. Oscar Macias-Ovalle, was identified through interceptions over TT5 and
`
`TT7, and other investigation, as a supplier to Angel Ramirez and others. As a result of the
`
`Page 3 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 4 of 8 Page ID#: 42
`
`interceptions over TT1, TT5, TT6, and TT7, the government sought and obtained this indictment
`
`and the Carrillo-Carrillo indictment in May 2008.
`
`The Rodriguez-Bello indictment, also returned in May 2008, is a product of this
`
`investigation, but is not based on any of the wiretaps.
`
` CHARGES
`
`The defendants in this case are charged with conspiring to distribute and possess with
`
`intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine, as well as cocaine and heroin, in
`
`violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A) and (C), all in
`
`violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 846. The conspiracy is alleged to have
`
`occurred from approximately July 19, 2007 through May 14, 2008 in the District of Oregon and
`
`elsewhere.2 Macias-Ovalle is also charged with possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or
`
`more of methamphetamine on premises where children reside, possession of firearms in
`
`furtherance of the drug trafficking offenses, and being an illegal alien in possession of firearms.
`
`Each of the defendants is facing a mandatory minimum of ten years and up to life imprisonment
`
`if convicted at trial.
`
`CURRENT SCHEDULE
`
`The defendants who have appeared thus far made their initial appearances on May 16 and
`
`19, 2008, and we arraigned on May 19 and 22, 2008. United States Magistrate Judge Donald
`
`Ashmanskas entered this Court’s standard order that discovery be produced in ten (10) days and
`
`motions be filed in twenty-one (21) days, and set trial for July 15, 2008.
`
`2
`Carrillo.
`
`The conspiracy in this case factually overlaps the conspiracy charged in Carrillo-
`
`Page 4 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 5 of 8 Page ID#: 43
`
`The government has provided initial discovery, including the interceptions in each of the
`
`wiretaps referenced above. However, discovery is ongoing and will take some time to complete.
`
`The government anticipates it will be able to produce the applications, affidavits, and orders for
`
`each of the wiretaps tomorrow afternoon or next Monday, and has agreed to produce the rough
`
`transcripts and “line sheets” summarizing the calls upon all counsel agreeing to the limited use
`
`of those documents. The government is also compiling other discovery and will produce the
`
`same as quickly as possible.
`
`COMPLEXITY
`
`As indicated above, this case involves six defendants and serious felony charges that
`
`could result in sentences ranging from a mandatory minimum of ten years’ imprisonment to life
`
`imprisonment, for each defendant. The charges include a conspiracy with others known and
`
`unknown that spanned approximately a 10-month period, and are based on months of court-
`
`authorized wire interceptions over multiple telephones (at least TT1, TT5, and TT7). Monitors
`
`intercepted thousands of pertinent conversations. The vast majority of the interceptions are in
`
`Spanish. The case also involves extensive physical surveillance, including the use of GPS
`
`tracking devices, and numerous search warrants related to the seizure of approximately 21
`
`pounds of methamphetamine, numerous firearms, and more than $49,000.00.
`
`As further noted above, this case is also related to several other indictments. Factually, it
`
`is related to Carrillo-Carrillo, et al., which involves another twelve named conspirators, and
`
`others known and unknown, numerous other searches and seizures, thousands of interceptions
`
`Page 5 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 6 of 8 Page ID#: 44
`
`over TT1 and TT6, and an undercover operation with controlled buys from Franco-Maldonado.3
`
`In addition, it is related to Osegera-Gonzalez, et al., CR 08-126-HA, and Rosas-Padilla, CR 08-
`
`131-HA, in that they involve overlapping wiretap applications, affidavits, and orders. The
`
`undercover agent in Carrillo-Carrillo also purchased controlled substances from defendants in
`
`Osegera-Gonzalez, et al. in his undercover capacity.
`
` Due to the overlaps between these cases, the government intends to provide duplicate
`
`discovery in all but the Rodriguez-Bello case.4 Discovery will likely exceed 10,000 pages in
`
`addition to the recorded interceptions. Depending on the number and length of final
`
`transcriptions prepared, it could be substantially higher.
`
`Finally, it is possible additional charges and defendants will be added in a superseding
`
`indictment, and this case may be joined with the indictment in Carrillo-Carrillo, et al.
`
`
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`Given the numbers of defendants, the nature of the charges, and the volume and scope of
`
`discovery involved, the parties agree that the case is “complex” within the meaning of the
`
`Speedy Trial Act, and that additional time will be needed for discovery, pretrial motions, and
`
`trial preparation. Specifically, additional time is needed for the government to complete
`
`production of discovery, including the translation and preparation of pertinent transcripts of
`
`recorded conversations; for defendants to review the discovery and assess the evidence, pretrial
`
`The case against the thirteenth defendant, Derek Coady, was previously
`3
`dismissed, as he is now deceased.
`
`As noted above, Rodriguez-Bello is not based on any of the wiretaps in this
`4
`investigation. It involved a completely separate undercover operation. To the extent any
`discovery in that case is relevant to any of the wiretap cases, and vice versa, the government will
`of course comply with its discovery obligations.
`
`Page 6 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 7 of 8 Page ID#: 45
`
`motions they may wish to file, and investigation and trial preparation they need to conduct; for
`
`defendants to research and prepare any such motions, including motions to suppress; and for
`
`both sides to thoroughly and adequately prepare for trial, taking into account the exercise of due
`
`diligence.
`
`Accordingly, the government requests the Court to declare this case complex, vacate the
`
`current dates, and schedule a status conference at which time new dates for discovery, motions,
`
`and trial may be set. The parties are all available to appear on July 14, 2008, which is the date
`
`the Court has set for a status conference in Osegera-Gonzalez, et al., and Rosas-Padilla. At that
`
`time, the Court should also exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act through and including the
`
`new trial date pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 3161(h)(3)(A), 3161(h)(7), and
`
`3161(h)(8)(A), considering the factors set forth in Section 3161(h)(8)(B)(I), (ii), and (iv). The
`
`period of time from the filing of this motion through and including the disposition of the motion
`
`should be excluded from the period of time within which trial must commence under Title 18,
`
`United States Code, Section 3161(h)(1)(F).
`
`The ends of justice served by the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the
`
`public and the defendants in a speedy trial, taking into account the factors set forth in Section
`
`3161(h)(8)(B), as discussed above. It would be unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for
`
`pretrial proceedings or the trial itself within the usual time limits established under the Speedy
`
`///
`
`///
`
`///
`
`Page 7 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE
`
`

`
`Case 3:08-cr-00228-MO Document 19 Filed 06/06/08 Page 8 of 8 Page ID#: 46
`
` Trial Act, and failure to grant the requested continuance would likely result in a miscarriage of
`
`justice or render the proceedings impossible to continue.
`
`DATED this 6th day of June 2008.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`KARIN J. IMMERGUT
`United States Attorney
`
` /s/ Jane H. Shoemaker
`SCOTT M. KERIN
`JANE H. SHOEMAKER
`Assistant United States Attorneys
`
`Page 8 - GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DECLARE CASE COMPLEX, VACATE
`CURRENT DATES, AND RE-SET ALL DATES AT A STATUS CONFERENCE