IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 7, 2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
GREGORY TEPENKIOZIS, DEFENDANT.
Defendant has filed a "Request that the terms of probation be modified to reflect that he has paid restitution in full." Dckt. No. 101. The document states that "the defendant might need judicial intervention into this issue." Id. It also notes a disagreement with the government as to whether the value of proceeds from forfeited property may be used to offset the amount of restitution that was ordered in the case. Currently, there is no properly filed motion before the court to rule on.
Rule 47(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that "[a] party applying to the court for an order must do so by motion." Rule 47 (b) and (c) prescribe the form, content and timing of a motion. The current request, which notes the underlying dispute and only states that court intervention "might" be necessary does not comply with Rule 47.
While it can be fairly inferred from the request that the defendant wants some form of order to resolve the restitution dispute, the document fails to "state the grounds on which it is based and the relief or order sought." Id. Accordingly, the request is denied without prejudice to its renewal by a proper motion with supporting authority.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.