USA v. Reid

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
United States of America
v. Criminal No. 05-cr-57-JD
Gordon Reid
O R D E R
Gordon Reid is charged with one count of robbery under the
Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951. He is proceeding pro se with
standby counsel. His first trial ended in a hung jury, and his
second trial will begin on July 18, 2006. On April 27, 2006,
Reid file a motion for access to the court and a motion for a
protective order, both of which are based on the circumstances of
his confinement following an incident at the jail when Reid was
“written up” for fighting. The government has now filed its
responses to those motions.
In his motions, Reid represents that after the fighting
incident, the jail denied him access to “the law computer
containing the Federal Lexis/Nexis and [Reid’s] electronic
files,” seized his “writing implements,” and would not allow him
to make or receive telephone calls. Reid further states that
after a second incident, the jail seized his legal papers and law
books. He asks the court to order the jail to allow him to have
access to a law library, to have access to the computer that he
Case 1:05-cr-00057-SM Document 304 Filed 05/31/06 Page 1 of 4

2
was using previously, to return his law books, files, and
documents, to return his writing implements, and to restore his
ability to make and receive telephone calls.
In its responses to Reid’s motions, the government states
that Reid “has been cited by jail officials for several
infractions and is currently under investigation by the Strafford
County Sheriff’s Department for further criminal behavior, i.e.,
assault on other inmate(s).” The government further states that
because of those incidents, Reid is now housed in a secure unit
and that his access to the computer was suspended. The
government represents that Reid’s computer access has been
reinstated and that his legal files and materials will be
returned to him to the extent they do not present a security
risk.
The government appended a copy of a notice sent to Reid by
the jail on May 23, 2006, which states that Reid’s mail will be
opened in his presence, his legal files will be returned as long
as there is no security issue, he will have one hour per day of
tier time, his attorney can call him “on the attorney phone on
the unit,” and Reid will be allowed out of his cell to receive
calls from his attorney depending on his behavior. The notice
further provides that as long as Reid is in the maximum security
unit he will be governed by the maximum security guidelines.
Case 1:05-cr-00057-SM Document 304 Filed 05/31/06 Page 2 of 4

3
Reid has moved to strike the government’s responses to his
motions. In support of his motion to strike, Reid appended a
copy of a letter from Assistant United States Attorney Donald
Feith to the superintendent of the Strafford County House of
Corrections, asking for information about the incidents at the
jail involving Reid and about transcripts that were sent to Reid
at the jail. Because that letter is dated May 12, 2006, and the
government requested an extension of time to respond to Reid’s
motions on May 9, 2006, in which it stated that it had
“requested, and is awaiting, reports from the Strafford County
house of Corrections,” Reid accuses the government of
misrepresenting the basis for the motion to extend. The date of
the letter alone, however, does not show a misrepresentation by
the government. Therefore, the motion is denied.
Reid also filed a reply, without seeking leave to do so, and
moves for an evidentiary hearing on his motions, based on his
belief that the government would file “Information Reports” about
his conduct at the jail in support of their responses. Contrary
to Reid’s assumption, however, the government did not file any
reports about his conduct at the jail. No hearing is required to
address Reid’s conduct or the jail’s reports.
Based on the government’s responses, it appears that Reid
now has access to the computer that he previously used for his
Case 1:05-cr-00057-SM Document 304 Filed 05/31/06 Page 3 of 4

4
legal work, that his legal files have been or soon will be
returned to him, and that he will be allowed to have telephone
contact with his attorney. He also has access to writing
implements, which is demonstrated by the motions he has filed
during the last few weeks. Therefore, the relief he sought in
his pending motions has been provided by the jail.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the defendant’s motions for a
protective order and access to the court (documents no. 278 and
279) are terminated as moot. The defendant’s supplemental motion
for transcripts (document no. 283) was resolved at the hearing
held on May 16, 2006, and is terminated. Reid’s motion to strike
and motion for a hearing (documents no. 292 and 293) are denied.
SO ORDERED.
____________________________
Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.
United States District Judge
May 31, 2006
cc: Gordon Reid, pro se
Michael J. Iacopino, Esquire
Helen w. Fitzgibbon, Esquire
Clyde R. W. Garrigan, Esquire
U.S. Probation
U.S. Marshal
Case 1:05-cr-00057-SM Document 304 Filed 05/31/06 Page 4 of 4