USA v. Andrist et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
United States of America, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	) 	ORDER
)
vs. 	)
) 	Case No.: 1:19-cr-073
Emily Jo Andrist, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
On June 3, 2019, defendant made her initial appearance and was arraigned in the above-
entitled action. Prior to her initial appearance, defendant was incarcerated by the State of North
Dakota at the Dakota Women's Correctional and Rehabilitation Center in New England, North
Dakota. After the Indictment in this case was returned and an arrest warrant issued, a detainer was
filed by the United States with North Dakota prison officials. Pursuant to the Interstate Agreement
on Detainers Act (“IADA”), defendant’s appearance before this court for her initial appearance and
arraignment was secured by a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum.
At her initial appearance and arraignment, defendant was advised of her 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 and was returned to the
custody of the State of North Dakota (the “sending state” under the IADA) pending further
proceedings in this case initiated by the United States (the “receiving state” under the IADA).
On October 10, 2019, defendant filed a Motion to Reconsider Order of Detention. 	She
anticipates that she will be paroled from the state prison system when the parole board meets on
1
Case 1:19-cr-00073-DLH Document 47 Filed 10/17/19 Page 1 of 3

November 1, 2019. She requests that, upon her release from the state prison system, she be placed
in a residential re-entry center. The United States does not object.
The Pretrial Services Office has advised the court that the residential facilities with which
it contracts have no space for defendant at present or, given the lengthy waiting list for such
placements, in the immediate future. Consequently, releasing defendant to a residential facility upon
her discharge from state custody is simply not an option at present. Rather, upon her discharge from
state custody, defendant will be held in federal custody until space becomes available at a residential
facility.
Accordingly, defendant’s motion (Doc. No. 41) is DENIED without prejudice. Upon her
release from the state prison system, defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney
General or designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent
practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.
Defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel.
On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, the person
in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver defendant to the United States Marshal for the
purpose of an appearance in connection with court proceedings.
Defendant shall be placed on the waiting list for a residential facility placement. In the
interim, should defendant want a hearing to address her custodial status, she may file an appropriate
motion.
2
Case 1:19-cr-00073-DLH Document 47 Filed 10/17/19 Page 2 of 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 17th day of October, 2019.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
3
Case 1:19-cr-00073-DLH Document 47 Filed 10/17/19 Page 3 of 3