Order on stay of surrender and monetary judgment and leave to file out of time

Summary

An Order in United States of America v. Jarrell Curne, Case No. 4:23-CR-00205-BCW-1, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, filed August 17, 2026 as Document 138. It recounts that on May 14, 2026 the defendant was sentenced to 36 months of imprisonment and 3 years of supervised release on one count of Wire Fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and ordered to pay restitution of $318,220.49 to the U.S. Small Business Administration, and that an appeal is pending. The order denies as moot the pro se request to stay the self-surrender date, since the defendant is in custody at FCI Leavenworth, and denies a stay of the monetary judgment because economic ruin is unsupported and success on appeal not shown. It also denies leave to file a late motion to arrest judgment under Fed. R. Crim. P. 34(b) for lack of excusable neglect, and is signed /s/ by Chief Judge Brian C. Wimes.

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

                 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                         WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
                              WESTERN DIVISION

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        )
                                                  )
                        Plaintiff,                )
                                                  )
 v.                                               )         Case No. 4:23-CR-00205-BCW-1
                                                  )
 JARRELL CURNE,                                   )
                                                  )
                        Defendant.                )

                                              ORDER
       Before the Court are Defendant’s motion to stay self-surrender date and execution of

monetary judgment (Doc. #133) and motion for leave to file out of time (Doc. #134). The Court,

being duly advised of the premises, denies said motions.

       On May 14, 2026, the Court sentenced Defendant to 36 months of imprisonment and 3

years of supervised release on one count of Wire Fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. (Doc.

#122). The Court also ordered Defendant to pay restitution in the amount of $318,220.49 to the

U.S. Small Business Administration. Id. at 6. Furthermore, the Court ordered Defendant to self-

surrender for service of his custodial sentence at the institution designated by the Bureau of Prisons

(“BOP”) on or before 2 p.m. on June 22, 2026. Id. at 2.

       On May 15, 2026, Defendant filed a notice of appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals,

and on May 19, 2026, the Court appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. (Docs. #125, #129).

Defendant’s appeal is currently pending.

       On June 10, 2026, Defendant filed a pro se motion asking to stay his self-surrender date to

an unknown time in the future and to stay enforcement of the monetary judgment pending

resolution of his appeal. (Doc. #133). On June 13, 2026, Defendant filed a second pro se motion



                                                  1

       Case 4:23-cr-00205-BCW           Document 138         Filed 08/17/26      Page 1 of 4
seeking leave to file out of time a motion to arrest judgment. (Doc. #134). The Government did

not respond to Defendant’s pro se motions.

       A. Defendant’s motion to stay is denied.

       Defendant argues the Court should stay his self-surrender date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

3143(b) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 38(b). (Doc. #133). Defendant argues his current self-surrender date

is the day after Father’s Day, which is a holiday that has caused him past trauma. Defendant also

asserts that he is not a flight risk or a risk to the community. Defendant further argues that

execution of the monetary judgment should be stayed until his appeal is resolved because “forcing

the collection or liquidation of assets while the foundational validity of the underlying conviction

is heavily contested on appeal would cause immediate, irreparable economic ruin.” Id. at 5.

       First, Defendant’s self-surrender date has passed, and he is presently in custody at FCI

Leavenworth. See https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/, Register Number: 76900-510. Consequently,

his request to stay or extend his self-surrender date is denied as moot.

       Furthermore, Defendant’s request to stay execution of the monetary judgment is denied

because he has not demonstrated that a stay would be appropriate in this case. Under Fed. R. Crim.

P. 38(e)(1), “[i]f the defendant appeals, the district court . . . may stay—on any terms considered

appropriate—any sentence providing for restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 3556 or notice under 18

U.S.C. § 3555.” Here, Defendant’s assertion that enforcement of the monetary judgment would

cause economic ruin is unsupported. And Defendant has not shown he is likely to succeed on

appeal. Thus, his request to stay execution of the monetary judgment is denied.

       B. Defendant’s motion to file out of time is denied for failure to show excusable
          neglect.

       Defendant argues he should be granted leave to file out of time a motion to arrest judgment

under Fed. R. Crim. P. 34(b). (Doc. #134). Defendant argues the “severe, ongoing ineffective


                                                 2

      Case 4:23-cr-00205-BCW            Document 138        Filed 08/17/26     Page 2 of 4
assistance of counsel and active misrepresentations by his former attorneys legally constitute

‘excusable neglect’ and ‘good cause.’” Id. at 2. Defendant claims he was coerced into pleading

guilty. Furthermore, Defendant claims he did not file the motion to arrest judgment within 14 days

because he was misled by his former trial counsel when she allegedly told him he was banned by

the Court from making any filings. In support, Defendant attaches emails of his communications

with his former counsel.

       Under Fed. R. Crim. P. 34(b), “[t]he defendant must move to arrest judgment within 14

days after the court accepts a verdict or finding of guilty, or after a plea of guilty or nolo

contendere.” Here, Defendant’s guilty plea was accepted by the Court on December 18, 2025, so

a motion to arrest judgment was due on or before January 2, 2026. (Doc. #113).

       When a party seeks an extension to file out of time, the party must make a showing of

excusable neglect. Fed. R. Crim. P. 45(b)(1)(B). Excusable neglect is an “elastic concept that

empowers courts to provide relief where a party’s failure to meet a deadline is caused by

inadvertence, mistake, or carelessness, as well as by intervening circumstances beyond the party’s

control.” Kurka v. Iowa Cnty., Iowa, 628 F.3d 953, 959 (8th Cir. 2010) (quotations omitted).

       Defendant has not shown excusable neglect justifying an extension of time. Defendant’s

motion focuses on attacking his guilty plea and arguing it was coerced by his former counsel.

Defendant’s claim that his counsel prevented him from filing is not supported by the exhibits he

attaches to his motion. Defendant provides no supportable explanation for why he could not file a

motion to arrest judgment by the deadline, nor do his emails demonstrate that he asked his counsel

to file such a motion. Defendant has not shown that his failure to meet the deadline was caused by

inadvertence, mistake, carelessness, or intervening circumstances, so his motion is denied.

Accordingly, it is hereby



                                                3

      Case 4:23-cr-00205-BCW           Document 138       Filed 08/17/26      Page 3 of 4
       ORDERED Defendant’s motion to stay self-surrender date and execution of monetary

judgment (Doc. #133) is DENIED. It is further

       ORDERED Defendant’s motion for leave to file out of time (Doc. #134) is DENIED.

       IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2026                          /s/ Brian C. Wimes
                                                BRIAN C. WIMES, CHIEF JUDGE
                                                UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT




                                                4

      Case 4:23-cr-00205-BCW         Document 138     Filed 08/17/26    Page 4 of 4


File and source

File

138-order-on-stay-of-surrender-and-monetary-judgment-and-leave-t.pdf

Size

115,139 bytes

SHA-256

b7754eff47040a3a4117886ada2651b8ca64dc16efe7c2444dc2758f4dca9ee4

Our copy

138-order-on-stay-of-surrender-and-monetary-judgment-and-leave-t.pdf

Original

No public link identified.