ORDER Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act as to Carl Delano Torjagbo — USA v. Torjagbo (Dkt. 187)

Summary

Magistrate's Criminal Minutes for an arraignment dated 05/22/2025, with an order under the Due Process Protections Act, Document 187, in United States v. Carl Torjagbo, Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC, Northern District of Georgia, with Magistrate Regina D. Cannon presiding. AUSA Nicholas Evert appeared for the government and L. Burton Finlayson for the defendant. The marked entries show a superseding indictment, formal reading waived, and a plea of not guilty. The minutes say the judge deferred ruling on the government's detention motion, the defendant does not contest detention at this time, and his motion for bond reconsideration is DENIED. The order directs the government to disclose all materials favorable to the defendant.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

MAGISTRATE'S CRIMINAL MINUTES 
ARRAIGNMENT 
PLEA AND 
SENTENCE 
Filed in Open Court: 
Date: 
05/22/2025 
Magistrate (presiding): REGINA D. CANNON 
Case Number: 
1 :22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC 
AUSA: 
Nicholas Evert 
USPO/PTR: 
ARREST DATE: 
INTERPRETER & LANGUAGE: 
Time in Court: 
Hrs 
Time: 
10:28 a.m. 
Tape: 
FTR 
Deputy Clerk: Phyllis Brannon 
Defendant's Name: 
Carl Torjagbo 
Defendant's Attorney: 
L. Burton Finlayson 
Type Counsel: ( ) Retained 
() CJA () FOP 
INITIAL APPEARANCE HEARING. ( ) In THIS DISTRICT 
Oft in custody? (X) Yes 
X 
Defendant advised of right to counsel. 
( ) WAIVER OF COUNSEL filed . 
ORDER appointing Federal Defender Program as counsel. ( ) INITIAL APPEARANCE ONLY. 
ORDER appointing I 
as counsel. 
4 
Min 
() Waived 
() No 
ORDER giving defendant I 
days to employ counsel (cc: served by Mag CRD) 
Oft to pay attorney fees as follows: I 
INFORMATION/INDICTMENT filed. 
I 
WAIVER OF INDICTMENT filed. 
X 
Copy information/indictment given to dft? (X) Yes ( ) No - Read to dft? ( ) Yes ( ) No (X) Waived formal reading 
CONSENT TO TRIAL BEFORE MAGISTRATE (Misd/Petty) offense filed. 
X 
ARRAIGNMENT HELD. (X) Superseding indictment 
I ( ) Dft's WAIVER of appearance filed. 
Arraignment continued to I 
at 
Request of ( ) Govt ( ) Oft 
Oft failed to appear for arraignment. 
Bench warrant issued 
X 
Oft enters PLEA OF NOT GUil TY. () Oft stood mute; plea of NOT GUil TY entered. () Waiver of appearance. 
MOTION TO CHANGE PLEA, and order allowing same. 
ASSIGNED to District 
I Judge 
for ( ) trial 
( ) arraignmenUsentence. 
ASSIGNED to Magistrate 
Judge 
for pretrial proceedings. 
Estimated trial time: 
I 
days. 
( )SHORT 
( )MEDIUM 
( )LONG 
PRE-SENTENCE INVESTIGATION filed. Referred to USPO for PSI and continued 
until 
I 
I at 
I 
I for sentencing. 
Government MOTION FOR DETENTION filed. Hearing set for 
I 
I at I 
Temporary commitment issued. 
Oft remanded to custody of US Marshals Service. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 187     Filed 05/22/25     Page 1 of 2

BOND/PRETRIAL DETENTION HEARING 
DETENTION/BOND hearing held. 
Government MOTION FOR DETENTION ( ) GRANTED ( 
) DENIED 
The Court DEFERRED ruling on the motion until it is ripe for a ruling. 
Defendant does not contest detention at this time. 
Defendant's Motion for Bond Reconsideration [Doc. ] is DENIED. 
WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. 
BOND SET at I 
I 
Non-surety 
Surety 
( 
) Cash ( 
) Property 
( 
) Corporate surety ONLY 
SPECIAL CONDITIONS: I 
Defendant: Carl D. Torjagbo 
Case No: 122cr171 
( ) WITHDRAWN 
Defendant to remain on pretrial release under the terms and conditions set forth in the U.S. District Court for the 
Bond filed. Defendant released. 
Defendant released on CONDITIONS ONLY. 
Bond NOT EXECUTED. 
Defendant to remain in Marshal's custody. 
x_ 
ORDER: 
Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act, see Fed. R. Crim. P. 5(f), the government is 
ORDERED to adhere to the disclosure obligations set forth in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 
(1963), and its progeny, and to provide all materials and information that are arguably favorable 
to the defendant in compliance with its obligations under Brady; Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 
150 (1972); and their progeny. Exculpatory material as defined in Brady; and Kyle v. Whitley, 514 
U.S. 419, 434 (1995), shall be provided sufficiently in advance of trial to allow a defendant to use 
it effectively, and exculpatory information is not limited to information that would constitute 
admissible evidence. The failure of the government to comply with its Brady obligations in a timely 
manner may result in serious consequences, including, but not limited to, the suppression or 
exclusion of evidence, the dismissal of some or all counts, adverse jury instructions, contempt 
proceedings, or other remedies that are just under the circumstances. 
WITNESSES: 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 187     Filed 05/22/25     Page 2 of 2

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.gand.303267.187.0.pdf

Size

158,837 bytes

SHA-256

7902a9d79cf643988305975e7ecbf33350fe6f5e692eacfeba521e932d65583b

Our copy

gov.uscourts.gand.303267.187.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)