Government opposition to post-conviction motion — U.S. v. Staveley/Butziger (D.R.I.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island · No. 1:20-cr-00074-MSM-LDA · Doc. 84 · 2022-08-31 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND 
 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  
) 
)   Criminal No. 20-074-MSM 
v. 
 
 
   
) 
) 
DAVID STAVELEY 
 
 
) 
 
Defendant. 
 
 
) 
 
 
 
 GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION 
ENTITLED “IMPROPER COMMUNICATION BY CHIEF JUDGE DISTRICT OF R.I.” 
 
 
On August 29, 2022, defendant David Staveley (“Staveley”) filed a motion seeking 
unspecified “immediate relief” based on his allegation that he was not given credit at sentencing 
for having been vaccinated against COVID-19. Staveley claims that Chief Judge McConnell’s 
remarks to prisoners at the Wyatt Detention Center led him to believe that the Court would look 
favorably upon him at sentencing if he chose to be vaccinated. Defendant’s motion is frivolous 
and should be immediately denied.  
 
The Government has no first-hand knowledge of any remarks the Chief Judge may have 
made to inmates at Wyatt. Based on defendant’s motion, it appears that the Chief Judge spoke to 
a group of inmates at Wyatt in an attempt to encourage vaccination. If so, this was an entirely 
appropriate step for the Court to take in order to protect the health and safety of the inmates, 
prison staff, defense counsel and court personnel. Judge McConnell certainly never promised any 
defendant a lesser sentence if he/she made the responsible choice and got vaccinated.  
 
Moreover, defendant does not and cannot argue that his decision to plead guilty was in 
any way influenced by the Chief Judge’s remarks encouraging vaccination. Defendant pled 
guilty because the evidence that he committed fraud on the Paycheck Protection Program was 
Case 1:20-cr-00074-MSM-LDA   Document 84   Filed 08/31/22   Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 924

2 
overwhelming as was the evidence that he intentionally failed to appear for a court appearance. 
Thus, even if defendant misinterpreted the Chief Judge’s statements as some sort of promise of 
leniency, there was absolutely no prejudice to the defendant because those statements were 
immaterial to his decision to plead guilty. 
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion should be denied. 
Respectfully submitted,    
ZACHARY A. CUNHA 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 
___________________________ 
LEE H. VILKER 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
Case 1:20-cr-00074-MSM-LDA   Document 84   Filed 08/31/22   Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 925

 
3 
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
 
I hereby certify that on this 31st day of August 2022, I caused the within Government’s 
Opposition to be filed electronically and it is available for viewing and downloading from the 
ECF system. I also certify that this Opposition has been mailed to: 
 
 
David Staveley 
 
Reg. No. 04230-049 
 
FMC Devens – Camp 
 
P.O. Box 879 
 
Ayer, MA 01432 
 
 
/s/ Lee H. Vilker________________  
 
LEE H. VILKER 
Assistant U. S. Attorney,  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U. S. Attorney's Office 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
50 Kennedy Plaza, 8th Floor 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Providence, RI 02903 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
401-709-5000, 401-709-5001 (fax) 
 
 
Case 1:20-cr-00074-MSM-LDA   Document 84   Filed 08/31/22   Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 926

File and source

File

043_ECF_84_gov.uscourts.rid.49679.84.0.pdf

Size

103,834 bytes

SHA-256

1eff59e510c14d10edf8ddaa0a857a1caf3c3ff05e641f1a1412f07d00e4e127

Our copy

043_ECF_84_gov.uscourts.rid.49679.84.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)