Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Opposition to Improper Communication Motion — United States v. David Staveley

Opposition to Improper Communication Motion — United States v. David Staveley

What This Document Is

This is the government's three-page opposition, filed August 31, 2022, to a pro se motion Staveley filed August 29, 2022 titled "Improper Communication by Chief Judge District of R.I.," seeking unspecified "immediate relief."

Factual Summary

The government states Staveley's motion is based on his allegation that he was not given sentencing credit for having been vaccinated against COVID-19, and that remarks by Chief Judge John J. McConnell to inmates at the Wyatt Detention Center led him to believe the court would look favorably on him at sentencing if he chose to be vaccinated. The government argues it has no first-hand knowledge of the Chief Judge's remarks but that any such encouragement of vaccination would have been an appropriate step to protect inmate, staff, and personnel health and safety, and that Staveley cannot show his guilty plea was influenced by those remarks. The opposition calls the motion frivolous and asks the court to deny it.

Key Facts

  • Document title: Government's Opposition to Defendant's Motion Entitled "Improper Communication by Chief Judge District of R.I."
  • Document type: Government's opposition to a pro se motion.
  • Document date: 2022-08-31.
  • Docket entry: 84.
  • Issuer/court: U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island.
  • Case name: United States v. David Staveley, No. 20-074-MSM.
  • Underlying claim: Staveley alleged Chief Judge John J. McConnell's remarks encouraging COVID-19 vaccination at the Wyatt Detention Center led him to expect a more favorable sentence for being vaccinated.
  • Government's position: the motion is frivolous and should be denied.

Source Caveats

  • The underlying pro se motion this opposes is not itself part of this docket segment's legible materials; Staveley's specific factual allegations about the Chief Judge's remarks are characterized here through the government's opposition rather than his own filing.
Date
2022-08-29

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
gov.uscourts.rid.49679.84.0.pdf
Size
103,834 bytes
SHA-256
1eff59e510c14d10edf8ddaa0a857a1caf3c3ff05e641f1a1412f07d00e4e127
Our copy
gov.uscourts.rid.49679.84.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top