U.S. v. HAGINS

Case No. 1:16-cr-244.

United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Adrian Dale Hagins, Defendant.

United States District Court, D. North Dakota.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael Justin Choquette, Defendant, represented by Scott Patrick Brand , Brudvik Law Office, P.C..

Adrian Dale Hagins, Defendant, represented by Luke Thomas Heck , SEVERSON, WOGSLAND & LIEBL, P.C..

USA, Plaintiff, represented by Jeremy Ensrud , U.S. Attorney's Office.


INTERSTATE AGREEMENT ON DETAINERS ORDER

CHARLES S. MILLER, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

On June 9, 2017, defendant made his initial appearance and was arraigned in the above-entitled action. SAUSA Jeremy Ensrud appeared on the Government's behalf. Attorney Luke Heck was appointed to represent defendant in ths matter and appeared on defendant's behalf.

Prior to his initial appearance, defendant was incarcerated by the State of North Dakota at the North Dakota State Penitentiary ("NDSP") in Bismarck, North Dakota. After the Superseding Indictment in this case was returned and an arrest warrant issued, a detainer was filed by the United States with the North Dakota prison officials. Pursuant to the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act ("IADA"), defendant's appearance before this court for his initial appearance and arraignment was secured by a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum.

At his initial appearance and arraignment, defendant was advised of his rights under the IADA to continued federal custody until the charges set forth in the Indictment are adjudicated. Defendant waived in open court the anti-shuttling provisions of the IADA.

Based on defendant's waiver, the court finds that knowingly, voluntarily, and upon advice of counsel waived the anti-shuttling provisions of the IADA in open court and agreed to return to the custody of the State of North Dakota (the "sending state" under the IADA) at the NDSP pending further proceedings in this case initiated by the United States (the "receiving state" under the IADA).

Accordingly, the court ORDERS that defendant be housed in the "sending state" under the IADA pending further proceedings or until further order of the court. Further, pursuant to defendant's waiver, the return of the defendant to his place of incarceration pending trial shall not be grounds under the IADA for dismissal of the charges set forth in the Indictment.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases