NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Arraignment Proceedings as to Brandon… — USA v. Thurmond et. al. (Dkt. 95)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia · No. 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE · Doc. 95 · 2024-07-11 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 
AUGUSTA DIVISION 
 
 
United States of America, 
)
) 
Plaintiff,
) 
) 
vs.
)   Case No. 1:23CR21 
) 
Barndon Jamal Thurmond,    
)
) 
Defendant.
) 
______________________________) 
 
 
ARRAIGNMENT 
BEFORE THE HONORABLE BRIAN K. EPPS 
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 
MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2023; 2:07 P.M. 
 
 
FOR THE PLAINTIFF: 
 
Jennifer A. Stanley, Esquire 
U.S. Attorney's Office 
Post Office Box 2017 
Augusta, Georgia 30903 
(706)724-0517 
 
FOR THE DEFENDANT: 
 
Michon D. Walker, Esquire 
Arthur L. Walker and Associates, LLC 
601 N. Belair Square, Suite 23 
Evans, Georgia 30809 
(706)210-4355 
 
TRANSCRIBED FROM DIGITAL RECORDING BY: 
 
Lisa H. Davenport, RPR, FCRR 
Post Office Box 5485 
Aiken, South Carolina 29804 
(706)823-6468 
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 1 of 13

     2
(Call to Order at 2:07 p.m.)
THE CLERK:  The court calls case 1:23CR21, the United
States of America v Brandon Jamal Thurmond.  Jennifer Stanley
for the government.  Michon Walker for the defendant.  Here for
arraignment.
THE COURT:  Good afternoon, everybody.
MRS. WALKER:  Good afternoon, Your Honor.
MS. STANLEY:  Good afternoon.
THE COURT:  Mrs. Walker, it's always good to see you.
I appreciate you being here to represent this defendant.  When
I saw him last week I talked with him for a minute, made a
finding he was competent.  Do you agree with that assessment?
MRS. WALKER:  I do, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  After reviewing his financial
affidavit he certainly qualifies for court-appointed counsel
and I hereby appoint you to represent him.
Let me say, Mr. Thurmond, that Mrs. Walker has been
doing this work here for a long time and she does it very well.
We have a -- what we call a panel of attorneys who are in
private practice -- very busy and have clients every day come
off the street and hire them to represent them in criminal
matters in this court and in state court.  Those private
attorneys volunteer to be on a panel of people to take these
cases.
At the end of the case Mrs. Walker will bill the court
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 2 of 13

     3
for the time that she's spent representing you and I'm very
proud of the quality of the lawyers that we have doing this
work in this court.  If you made a list of the top 10 criminal
defense attorneys in the Augusta area, I'm pretty sure probably
9, if not 10, out of 10 of them are on this court appointed
panel that we have.  That shows you the quality of the
representation and we demand a lot out of them.
We demand a very high level of excellence in the work
that they do for their clients.  If we see any sign that
they're not living up to that standard, we just don't give them
cases any more.  So, we monitor this system -- this panel --
very carefully and Mrs. Walker has been doing that work here
very well for a very long time and Mrs. Walker, I think, does
it because she understands the importance to our community of
having lawyers who are highly trained and skilled represent
people who can't otherwise afford to hire someone to represent
them.
I'm proud we live in a country where we take freedom
that seriously -- right? -- to make sure that even when you
can't afford one that a lawyer is by your side to make sure
that your case is heard and so I guess the simplest way to say
it is you're in good hands with her as you go through this
process and I appreciate her being here to represent you.
We already went through his basic rights to legal
representation, his right to remain silent.  We reviewed the
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 3 of 13

     4
charges last time and made sure he understood both those and
the maximum penalties and we made sure he had copies of the
documents as well.  So, really, there is not much left to be
done.
Mrs. Walker, after talking with him is it his wish to
waive a formal reading of the Indictment and enter a plea of
not guilty?
MRS. WALKER:  Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  What is the discovery policy of the
government and the status of providing discovery to
Mrs. Walker?
MS. STANLEY:  Your Honor, the government is providing
discovery in this case pursuant to its expanded discovery
policy.  This will be provided by hand delivery.  I received a
thumb drive from Mrs. Walker this afternoon and we will upload
it to that thumb drive when I return to the office.  The
discovery in this initial production is approximately 250
gigabytes in size.  It consists generally of FBI reports,
records obtained by subpoena from various financial
institutions, internet service providers and phone service
providers, audio recordings of interviews, loan files,
Unemployment Insurance files, documents relating to a search of
defendant La'Kyera Thurmond's residence, data from cellphones
and laptops seized during that search of defendant La'Kyera
Thurmond's residence, documents relating to a seizure of funds
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 4 of 13

     5
from defendant Brandon Thurmond's Navy Federal Credit Union
account as well as other items.  An index of the discovery will
be included with that production.
The grand jury transcript has not yet been received by
our office but that will be turned over when we receive it.
There are also two body camera videos that will be turned over
when they are received.  This is all known discoverable
material generated by any state and/or federal law enforcement
agency in this case and should satisfy the local rules, Rule 16
of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and any relevant
Supreme Court precedent including Brady, Jencks, and Giglio and
their progeny.
This production excludes items protected by the
Attorney Work Product Doctrine, the attorney-client privilege,
and the Bank Secrecy Act.  The government is, of course, aware
of its continuing discovery obligations and if we receive any
additional discoverable material it will be promptly
transmitted to the defendant.
THE COURT:  Okay.  I thank you for that.
Mrs. Walker, knowing what you know about the case so
far, how much time do you think you need for filing pretrial
motions?
MRS. WALKER:  Your Honor, based upon the email that I
received the information is voluminous.  So the normal 14 to 21
days will not be adequate.
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 5 of 13

     6
THE COURT:  I imagined that would be the case.
MRS. WALKER:  Not having spoken with the
co-defendant's counsel, I would think maybe three months.
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  We'll set that deadline
at three months then.
And will the government -- will that be sufficient
time for the government to make its government witness expert
disclosures under Rule 16 and to file any pretrial motions the
government may have?
MS. STANLEY:  Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  We'll set that deadline
then and, of course, by that date the government will disclose
any expert witnesses that it would like to use at trial.
How much time will you need after you see their
disclosures to decide whether you want to hire any defense
expert witnesses and to make those disclosures back to the
government?
MRS. WALKER:  45 days, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  I'm sorry?
MRS. WALKER:  45 days.
THE COURT:  45 days?  Okay.
MRS. WALKER:  Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Well, let's put that at an even 60, too,
maybe.
MRS. WALKER:  Yes, Your Honor.
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 6 of 13

     7
THE COURT:  It is just a lot of work.  A lot of
defense attorneys, I think, are underestimating the time and I
would rather give you more than enough to take care of it
unless you think that's too long.
MRS. WALKER:  No, Your Honor.  That's sufficient.
THE COURT:  Okay.  Let's do that then.  The first
deadline at 60 and the second one at 60 as well.
All right.  I want you to understand what we just
talked about because it's very important to your case and if I
were in your shoes, Mr. Thurmond, I wouldn't understand.  The
government has conducted an investigation and it's obviously
collected a lot of information about this case and as a matter
of common sense and fairness you should be able to receive a
lot of that information so that you can get ready for trial and
that's what the rules say.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 sets forth a
list of the types of documents that a government prosecutor
must disclose in a case like this to the defendant.  Local
rules of this court also talk about those same disclosure
obligations.  The Supreme Court of the United States from time
to time has issued decisions talking about prosecutorial
disclosure obligations in cases you may have heard of.  Brady,
Giglio, and Jencks are the three most well known of those cases
and there are other statutes passed by Congress over time that
also further defined those disclosure obligations and what you
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 7 of 13

     8
heard Ms. Stanley provide you just a couple of minutes ago is
consistent with what I hear in almost every case over the 10
years that I've been on the bench which is a very broad
assurance to you that at the very beginning of the case the
government is providing to your attorney all of the information
that you're entitled to receive as you prepare for trial in
this matter under every authority that governs this process.
I have given Mrs. Walker time to look through that
information and decide whether to file any pretrial motions on
your behalf.  Pretrial motions are documents filed with the
court asking the court to take certain action in advance of
trial and in some cases those motions need to be filed; they're
necessary; and should be filed.  In other cases it's completely
a waste of time.  It is unnecessary.  It just depends on the
facts of your case, the manner in which the investigation was
conducted, the manner in which the charges and the nature of
the charges brought against you and a host of other factors
that Mrs. Walker is very familiar with.
So over the next couple of months she'll be reviewing
the information provided by the government, talking with you
about it and telling you whether she's decided to file any
pretrial motions or whether she thinks the best thing to do is
to focus on getting ready for the trial of the case.  Do you
understand that?
THE DEFENDANT:  Yes, sir.
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 8 of 13

     9
THE COURT:  Okay.  Pursuant to the Due Process
Protections Act I hereby confirm the government's obligation to
produce all exculpatory information to this defendant pursuant
to Brady versus Maryland and its progeny and I hereby order the
government to do so.  Failure to do so in a timely manner may
result in consequences that could include, but may not be
limited to, dismissal of charges, sanctions, and maybe limiting
instructions at the trial of the case.
So that just reaffirms what we just talked about as
you just heard me say.  The consequences of a prosecutor not
disclosing information to you as they're required under law can
lead to pretty severe consequences for the prosecution.  So I
think that should give you some reassurance that what she's
told you she's given you today here in court is an accurate
representation of what actually is being given to your
attorney.
All right.  We already talked about the fact that it
appears even if we had a bond hearing it wouldn't really
accomplish anything, but he is still entitled to one,
Mrs. Walker.  Have you talked with him about that situation?
Does he want a bond hearing now or would he like to waive it
now with a personal assurance from me that if at any time he
changes his mind I'm glad to have a hearing?
MRS. WALKER:  Your Honor, we would choose to waive it
now --
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 9 of 13

    10
THE COURT:  Okay.
MRS. WALKER:  -- with the ability to request a
detention hearing in the future.
THE COURT:  Okay.  Mrs. Stanley?
MS. STANLEY:  Your Honor, I'd indicated at the initial
appearance that we were moving for detention and I spoke with
Mrs. Walker just before this hearing.  I'd like to withdraw
that.  The government is not seeking detention of this
defendant.
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  And so he'll be
transported back to state custody ---
MRS. WALKER:  Your Honor, we would ask that he be --
remain in Lincoln County.
THE COURT:  Yeah, well, so where is he serving his
term?
Where are you serving your term of imprisonment?
THE DEFENDANT:  Wheeler.  
THE COURT:  I'm sorry?  
THE DEFENDANT:  Wheeler Correctional Facility.
THE COURT:  Where?
THE DEFENDANT:  Wheeler in Alamo, Georgia.
THE COURT:  Alamo.  How far is that from here?
THE DEFENDANT:  About two hours and something like 40
minutes.
THE COURT:  Ms. Stanley, well, I mean, I have never in
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 10 of 13

    11
10 years seen the government do that.  Almost every time -- I
think every time a defendant has been incarcerated in a state
facility the government sought detention I think in part for
the benefit of the defendant.  What would be the difference
here?
MS. STANLEY:  Mrs. Walker and I did discuss this, Your
Honor.  I think candidly there is very little evidence under
the statute that would allow the government to prove that the
defendant is a risk of flight and that is why I don't think
it's appropriate for us to seek detention.  That's the only
statutory basis that we could move for detention.  I do
understand there might be some opposition ---
THE COURT:  Danger to the community?
MS. STANLEY:  I don't believe under the statute that
that would be a basis here, Your Honor --
THE COURT:  Okay.
MS. STANLEY:  -- given the charge, but I think that
there was some opposition by the defendant to being housed in
Lincoln County.  I know that Jefferson County is also an option
and so if that would be more convenient for both the defendant
and his attorney, the government wouldn't have any objection
with that.
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, but the preliminary threshold
issue is whether the government is seeking detention or not.
If the government is not -- and I am not telling you what to
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 11 of 13

    12
do.  It's your call in that regard.  I don't think he's a
flight risk and so especially since he is going to be
incarcerated in state --
MS. STANLEY:  Right.  It is really a moot question.
THE COURT:  -- it's up to the government, you know,
whether you're moving for detention or not in the first
instance.
MS. STANLEY:  We're not moving for detention, Your
Honor.
THE COURT:  All right.  He will be remanded to the
custody of the state officials because I don't really have any
control over that, Mrs. Walker.
MRS. WALKER:  Okay.  Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  Is there anything further from the
defense perspective we need to talk about?
MRS. WALKER:  No, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Anything further from the government's
perspective?
MS. STANLEY:  No, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  We're adjourned.
(The hearing is concluded.)
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 12 of 13

    13
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER 
 
 
 
 
I, Lisa H. Davenport, Federal Official Court Reporter, in 
and for the United States District Court for the Southern 
District of Georgia, do hereby certify that pursuant to Section 
753, Title 28, United States Code that the foregoing is a true 
and correct transcript of record of the digitally-recorded 
proceedings to the best of my ability and that the transcript 
page format is in conformance with the regulations of the 
Judicial Conference of the United States. 
 
 
 
 
_______________________________ 
 
Lisa H. Davenport, RPR, FCRR 
Federal Official Court Reporter 
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE     Document 95     Filed 07/11/24     Page 13 of 13
Digitally signed by 
Lisa Davenport 
Date: 2024.07.11 
14:39:45 -04'00'

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.gasd.89394.95.0.pdf

Size

149,988 bytes

SHA-256

02d7473c876d4867fd1aaf736dbf81167f487da4a626dc0346e4cad16187dc12

Our copy

gov.uscourts.gasd.89394.95.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)