Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-6_14-mj-00128/USCOURTS-caed-6_14-mj-00128-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Evan King
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

HEATHER E. WILLIAMS, CA SBN #122664

Federal Defender

ERIN SNIDER, CA SBN #304781

Assistant Federal Defender

2300 Tulare Street, Suite 330

Fresno, CA 93721-2226

Telephone: (559) 487-5561

Fax: (559) 487-5950

Attorney for Defendant

EVAN KING

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

EVAN KING,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 6:14-mj-00128-MJS

STIPULATION TO CORRECT CLERICAL 

ERROR IN JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO 

FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL 

PROCEDURE 36; ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties through their respective 

counsel, Yosemite Legal Officer Susan St. Vincent, counsel for the plaintiff, and Assistant 

Federal Defender Erin Snider, counsel for defendant Evan King, that the December 18, 2015 

Judgment be corrected to state that the previously ordered fine of $240 is waived.

On February 4, 2015, the Court sentenced Mr. King to twelve months of unsupervised 

probation. February 4, 2015 Judgment, Docket No. 5, at 2. Among other conditions, Mr. King 

was ordered to pay a $240 fine and a $10 special assessment, for a total monetary penalty of 

$250. Id. at 3. On September 29, 2015, Mr. King admitted to violating the terms of his 

probation, including failing to pay the fine. September 29, 2015 Minutes, Docket No. 11. The 

Court sentenced Mr. King on the probation violations on December 16, 2015. December 16, 

2015 Minutes, Docket No. 17. At that time, consistent with the parties’ plea agreement, the 

Court waived the previously ordered fine and ordered Mr. King to pay only the $10 special 

Case 6:14-mj-00128-MJS Document 20 Filed 09/12/16 Page 1 of 3
 -2-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Evan / Stipulation for

Corrected Judgment

assessment. Id.; see also Plea Agreement, Docket No. 16, at 2. The Court entered a Judgment 

on December 18, 2015. December 18, 2015 Judgment, Docket No. 18. Contrary to the Court’s 

oral pronouncement of judgment, the written Judgment provides that “[a]ny previously imposed 

criminal monetary penalties that remain unpaid shall [remain] in effect.” Id. at 1.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36, “the court may at any time correct a 

clerical error in a judgment . . . arising from oversight or omission.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. Here, 

the parties request that the Court issue a corrected judgment that conforms to the Court’s oral 

pronouncement of judgment by excluding the language “[a]ny previously imposed criminal 

monetary penalties that remain unpaid shall [remain] in effect” and adding language specifically 

waiving the previously imposed $240 fine. See United States v. Kaye, 739 F.2d 488, 490 (9th 

Cir. 1984) (noting that a court may use Rule 36 to “conform the sentence to the term which the 

record indicates was intended”). An amended judgment is necessary, as the records of the Clerk 

of Court continue to reflect an outstanding balance of $240 and the Clerk of Court cannot correct 

this issue without an order from the Court.

Respectfully submitted,

Date: September 9, 2016 /s/ Susan St. Vincent

SUSAN ST. VINCNENT

Yosemite Legal Officer

Counsel for the Plaintiff

HEATHER E. WILLIAMS

Federal Defender

Date: September 9, 2016 /s/ Erin Snider

ERIN SNIDER

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant

EVAN KING

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 6:14-mj-00128-MJS Document 20 Filed 09/12/16 Page 2 of 3
 -3-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Evan / Stipulation for

Corrected Judgment

O R D E R

IT IS SO ORDERED. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36, the Court 

corrects the December 18, 2015 Judgment to remove the language providing that “[a]ny 

previously imposed criminal monetary penalties that remain unpaid shall [remain] in effect” and 

adding language specifically waiving the previously imposed $240 fine. A corrected judgment 

shall follow.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 12, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 6:14-mj-00128-MJS Document 20 Filed 09/12/16 Page 3 of 3