USA v. Esperanza-Vasquez
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) ) Criminal Action No. 2015-0017 MIGUEL ESPERANZA-VASQUEZ, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) Attorneys: Christian H. Stringer, Esq., St. Croix, U.S.V.I. For the Government Gabriel J. Villegas, Esq., St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. Omodare B. Jupiter, Esq., St. Croix, U.S.V.I. For Defendant ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s “Motion to Seal Document,” wherein Defendant requests—without stating any legal basis or explanation—to file his sentencing memorandum under seal. (Dkt. No. 46). “The First Amendment right of access to criminal proceedings is firmly established.” United States v. Smith, 123 F.3d 140, 146 (3d Cir. 1997) (citing Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980)). …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-1_15-cr-00017/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_15-cr-00017-0.pdf
SHA-256 e45c592c08a2539062d268e8d67a2c981072b0e42d5ef58c53654c02fac26680
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-e45c592c08a2
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) ) Criminal Action No. 2015-0017 MIGUEL ESPERANZA-VASQUEZ, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) Attorneys: Christian H. Stringer, Esq., St. Croix, U.S.V.I. For the Government Gabriel J. Villegas, Esq., St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. Omodare B. Jupiter, Esq., St. Croix, U.S.V.I. For Defendant ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s “Motion to Seal Document,” wherein Defendant requests—without stating any legal basis or explanation—to file his sentencing memorandum under seal. (Dkt. No. 46). “The First Amendment right of access to criminal proceedings is firmly established.” United States v. Smith, 123 F.3d 140, 146 (3d Cir. 1997) (citing Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980)). “[F]or a district court to seal a criminal proceeding or records, ‘particularized findings must be made on the record in each case, (1) establishing the existence of a compelling governmental interest, and (2) demonstrating that absent limited restrictions upon the right of access, that other interest would be substantially impaired.’” Id. at 147 (quoting United States v. Antar, 38 F.3d 1348, 1359 (3d Cir. 1994)). Thus, “where a right of access exists, the Case: 1:15-cr-00017-WAL-GWC Document #: 48 Filed: 06/16/16 Page 1 of 2 2 proponent of closure bears a strong burden in rebutting the ‘presumption of openness.’” Antar, 38 F.3d at 1362. In the instant Motion, Defendant provides no basis upon which the Court can make “particularized findings” that an “overriding interest compels some limitation upon the right of access” to criminal records, and that sealing Defendant’s sentencing memorandum “is the least restrictive means possible” of protecting that interest. Antar, 38 F.3d at 1363. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant’s “Motion to Seal Document” is DENIED. SO ORDERED. Date: June 16, 2016 _______/s/________ WILMA A. LEWIS Chief Judge Case: 1:15-cr-00017-WAL-GWC Document #: 48 Filed: 06/16/16 Page 2 of 2