Opinion
1:12-CR-00387-AWI-BAM
03-16-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JAIME ORNELAS, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING LEAVE FOR FEDERAL DEFENDER TO WITHDRAW
ORDER FOR UNITED STATES TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SENTENCE MODIFICATION
(DOC. NO. 28)
Defendant Jaime Ornelas pleaded guilty to violations of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine) and 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm), Doc. No. 14, and was ordered to serve concurrent sentences totaling 151 months in the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons. Doc. Nos. 23 and 24.
Ornelas has brought a motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Doc. No. 28 at 1. The motion also includes a request for court-appointed counsel and a financial affidavit showing that Defendant is unable to afford counsel. Id. at 2.
The motion consists of a one-page fill-in-the-blank form. Doc. No. 28 at 1. The form appears to contain some facts regarding Ornelas's crime and incarceration, but it contains no argument as to why a sentence modification is warranted or what form of modification should be applied. Id. To date, the United States has not responded to the motion.
On January 13, 2023, the Court issued an order appointing the Federal Defender to provide representation to Ornelas in connection with his motion for sentence reduction. Doc. No. 29. Specifically, the Court directed the Federal Defender to review this matter with Ornelas and determine whether Ornelas would stand on, supplement or withdraw his motion. Id. The Order was based on the existence of a plea agreement and the technicalities of applicable sentencing guidelines, as well as the fact that Ornelas had representation in connection with the plea agreement. Id.
On February 24, 2023, the Federal Defender filed a notice stating that the Federal Defender would not file a supplement to Ornelas's motion because Ornelas ‘ha[d] not provided a definitive response to [the Federal Defender's] communications.” Doc. No. 32 at 2. Further, the Federal Defender requested leave to withdraw as counsel in this matter. Id. The notice was served by mail on Ornelas at his address of record in this case. Id.
The decision to grant or deny an attorney's motion to withdraw is committed to the discretion of the trial court. McCoy v. Holguin, 2021 WL 4846242, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 27, 2021). Where withdrawal would leave a client without representation in the district court for the Eastern District of California, withdrawal is governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California (“California Rules of Professional Conduct”). Desai v. Lincoln Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 2020 WL 8181518, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2020); L.R. E.D. Cal. 182(d).
Subject to certain limitations that do not appear to be applicable here, Rule 1.16(a)(4) of the California Rules of Professional Conduct provides that counsel shall withdraw when discharged by a client, and Rule 1.16(b)(4) provides that counsel may withdraw where a client makes it “unreasonably difficult” to provide effective representation. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.16(a)(4), (b)(4). At least one-and arguably both-of these requirements have been met here since Ornelas has not accepted the Federal Defender as counsel and Ornelas's failure to communicate precludes the Federal Defender from providing proper representation. The Federal Defender's request for leave to withdraw as counsel in this matter will therefore be granted, and the United States will be ordered to respond to Ornelas's motion for sentence modification as filed on June 7, 2022. Doc. No. 28.
ORDER
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Federal Defender's request to withdraw as counsel in this matter is GRANTED effective immediately, subject to timely fulfillment of any obligations the Federal Defender may have under Rule 1.16(e) of the California Rules of Professional Conduct;
2. The United States is ORDERED to respond to Jaime Ornelas's motion for sentence modification (Doc. No. 28), as filed on June 7, 2022, within 28 calendar days of the date of electronic service of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.