T hi s panel has det erm i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d not * m a te ri a lly a s s is t th e d e te rm in a tio n o f th is a p p e a l. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a)(2); 10t h C i r . R . 34. 1( G ) . T he ca s e i s t her efor e or der ed s ubm i t t ed w i thoutor al ar gum ent . T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptundert he d o ctri n es o f law o f th e c ase , res jud icata, and co ll ateral estop p el. T h e c o u rt gener al l ydi s favor s t he ci t at i on of or der s and j udgm ent s ; neverthel es s , an or der a n d ju d g m e n t m a yb e c ite d u n d e r t h e te rm s a n d c o n d itio n s o f 1 0 th C ir . R . 3 6 .3 . 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### O c t ob e r4,2006 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS F O R T H E T E N T H C IR C U IT UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA , Pl ai nt i ff- A ppel l ee, v . J O SE A N TO N I O CO S, D e fe n d a n t-A p p e llan t. N o. 06- 2244 ( D. C. No . CR- 0 5 - 1 6 1 9 J B) (D . N .M .)

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efor e KELLY , B RI S CO E , and O’ BRI EN , C i rcui tJudg es.

J os e A nt oni o C os appea l s the di s tr i ctcourt ’ s or derof cont i nued det ent i on p en d ing ap p ea l bythe g o v ern m en t of the c o u rt ’s ord er g ran ti n g d efen d an t’ s mo t i o n t o s u p p r e s s . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U. S . C. § 1 2 9 1 a n d 1 8 U. S . C. § 3145( c) . W e affi r m t he di s t r i ctcourt ’ s deci s i on t o det ai n M r . C os pendi ng-2-

app eal . W e rem and on t he li m i t ed q uest i on of w hetherthe lengt h o f M r. C os’ p re tr ia l d e te n tio n im p lic a te s d u e p ro c e s s c o n c e rn s . I T he fe der al char ges i n t hi s cas e ar os e outof an a rr es tw arr antforM r . C os t hatt he A l buquer que Pol i ce D epart m entw as exec ut i ng athi s r es i dence . T he w arr antw as bas ed on cha r ges fordom es t i c vi ol ence , ki dnapi ng and aggr avat ed as s aul tw i t h i nt entt o comm i ta vi ol entfel onyon a hous ehol d m ember . W hen the offi cers arr i ved atM r. C os’ apartm ent t o ex ecute the w arr ant, on e of M r. C os’ form ergi r l fr i ends , FeatherR i cker , opened the door . She di d notl i ve i n the apart m entorhave a keyt o t he apa r t m ent . She w as atthe apa r t m entw i th herthr ee chi l dr en t o us e the apa r t m entpool . She t ol d the off i cer s thatM r . C os w as notat hom e and theyas ked i f theycoul d l ook forM r . C os i n the apa r t m ent . M s . R i cker i ndi cat ed thatt heycoul d do s o. D ur i ng t he cour s e of thei rs ear ch forM r . C os , the off i cer s found a l oaded handgun undera bed. T he off i cer s l earned thatM r . C os had pr i orfel ony co n v ict ion s an d thu s d id n o t hav e the ri g h t t o p o sses s the firearm . T h e o fficers a rr e s te d M r. C o s w h e n h e a rr iv e d a t th e a p a rt m e n t. A compl ai ntw as fi l ed i n t he U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tforthe D i s tr i ctof N e w M e x ico c h a rg in g M r. C o s w ith b e in g a fe lo n in p o ss e ss io n o f a fire a rm in viol at i on of 1 8 U . S . C . § 9 22 (g) (1) . T he g ov ernm ent m ov ed fo r M r. C os’ det ent i on pendi ng t r i al on t he gr ounds thathe w as a fl i ghtr i s k and a da ngert o t he-3-

comm uni t y . T he magi s t r at e j udge agr eed w i th the governm entand or der ed M r . C os det ai ned pendi ng t r i al . M r . C os has been de t ai ned s i nce J une 29, 2005. T r i al w as or i gi nal l ys chedul ed forSept ember12, 2005. M r . C os m oved for a cont i nuance and i tw as gr ant ed. M r . C os then fi l ed a mot i on t o s uppr es s the frui t s of the off

i cer s ’ entr yi nt o and s ear ch of hi s apart m ent , i ncl udi ng the handgun thati s t he s ubj ectof the i ndi ctm ent . A hear i ng w as hel d on the mot i on i n N ovember2005. O n A pr i l 25, 2006, the di s tr i ctcour tgr ant ed M r . C os ’ m ot i on t o s uppr es s t he evi dence . T he nextday , M r . C os fi l ed a mot i on for re c o n s id e ra tio n o f

h is d e te n tio n o rd e r. T h a t m o tio n w a s d e n ie d o n M a y5 . T he governm entfi l ed a mot i on forr econs i der at i on and a s uppl ement al m oti on for r econ si derat i on of the dis tri ctcou rt ’s supp res si on order. T ho se m ot i ons w er e deni ed on M ay17. T he governm entthen fi l ed anotherm ot i on for r econs i der at i on, w hi ch w as deni ed on J une 9. Fi nal l y , the governm entfi l ed an a p p e a l o f

th e d istric t co u rt’s d e c isio n o n Ju n e 2 9 . T h a t ap p e a l is c u rre n tly p e n d in g b e fo re th is c o u rt . O n July25 , 20 06 , M r. C os fi l ed a m oti on i n the di stri ctcou rtfor r el ease pendi ng appea l . T he di s t r i ctcour tdeni ed the mot i on and thi s appea l fol l ow ed. II A m o tio n se e k in g re lea se p e n d in g a n a p p e a l b yth e g o v e rn m e n t is c o n tro lled b y1 8 U .S .C . § 3 1 4 3 , w h ich p ro v id e s th a t a c o u rt sh o u ld tre a t a d e fe n d a n t in th is s itu a tio n a c c o rd in g to § 3 1 4 2 . See § 3 1 4 3 (c ). U n d e r § 3 1 4 2 , a-4-

defe ndantm aybe det ai ned onl yi f the j udi ci al offi cerfi nds that“no condi t i on or combi nat i on of condi t i ons w i l l r eas onabl yas s ur e the appe ar ance of the per s on as r equi r ed and the s afe t yof anyot herper s on and the comm uni ty . ” Id. § 3 1 4 2 (e ). In m a k in g th is d e ter m in a tio n , the c o u rt m u st c o n sid e r th e fo llo w in g fa c to rs: ( 1) t he natur e and c i r cumst ance s of the offens e cha r ged, i ncl udi ng w hetherthe offe ns e i s a cr i m e of vi ol ence ori nvol ves a nar cot i c drug; ( 2) the w ei ghtof the evi dence agai ns tt he per s on; ( 3) the hi s t or yand cha r act er i s t i cs of the per s on; and ( 4) t he natur e and s er i ous nes s of the dange rt o anyper s on orthe comm uni tythat w o u ld b e p o s e d b yth e p e rs o n ’s re le a s e . Id. § 3 1 4 2 (g) We r e v i e w de novo m i xed ques t i ons of l aw and fa ctconce rni ng t he d e te n tio n d e c is io n . Uni t ed Stat es v. C is ner os , 3 2 8 F . 3 d 6 1 0 , 6 1 3 (10 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). W e re v iew the d istri ct co u rt ’s find ing s o f fac t fo r clear e rror. Id. T he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s D eci s i ons In it s d ec isi o n d en y ing the re q u est fo r release p en d ing the g o v ern m en t’ s appea l of the s uppr es s i on or der , the di s tr i ctcour tconcl uded thatM r . C os

“ r e ma i n s a d a n g e rt o t h e c o mmu n i tya n d a fl i g h tr i s k fo rs u b s t a n t i a l l yth e s a me r eas ons t hatt he C our ts etfor t h i n i t s M ay5, 2006 M emora ndum O pi ni on and O rd e r.” A p lt. A p p . at 1 4 7 . T h e c o u rt w e n t o n to n o te th a t: C os ’ t w o pr i ordrug convi ct i ons , atl eas tone of w hi ch i nvol ves t r aff i cki ng, al s o cont i nue t o conce rn the C our t , es peci al l yi n l i ghtof C os ’ pos s es s i on of a l oaded f i r earm . T he pi ctur e thatthe C our thas of C os , gi ven the evi dence i n the r ecor d, i s thathe enga ges i n drug-5-

t r aff i cki ng act i vi t i es . C os ’ conductr evea l s an i ndi vi dual w ho has refused t o reform his cri m i nal w ay s. Id. a t 1 4 8 . I n t he M ay2006 or deraddr es s i ng M r . C os ’ r eques tt o r econs i derthe det ent i on or deraft ert he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s s uppr es s i on of the evi dence , the di s tr i ct cou rtanaly zed the § 3 14 2 fac t ors and m ade the foll ow i ng fi nd i ng s: T h e n a tu re a n d c irc u m sta n c e s o f th e o ffe n se c h a rg e d re m a in u n c h a n g e d . W h ile th e w e ig h t o f th e e v id e n c e m a yh a v e c h a n g e d in l i ghtof the C our t ’ s s uppr es s i on of the fi r earm , thatfac t ors houl d not be gi ven much w ei ghtbeca us e the U ni t ed St at es m ayappea l that ru lin g . T h e g u n is s til l av a ilab le a s p o ss ib le e v id e n c e ; th e iss u e is w hetheri ti s admi s s i bl e. Fur ther , C os ’ hi s t or yand cha r act er i s t i cs r ai s e a s i gni fi cantr i s k of non- appea r ance beca us e of the l ack of in fo rm a tio n th e C o u rt h a s a b o u t h is fa m ily , ab o u t w h a t h e is d o in g in th e c o m m u n ity, a b o u t h is e m p lo ym e n t, a n d a b o u t h is fin a n c ia l tie s . Re g a r d i n g h i s c r i mi n a l h i s t o ry , h e wa s a d e fe n d a n ti n two cons ol i dat ed ca s es i n s t at e courtand demonstr at ed poorper form ance w hil e on supervi sed rel ease. A ccordi ng t o P retri al S ervi ces, he als o has a numberof al i as es . W hi l e ther e w as s om e di s put e atthe hea r i ng w h e th e r C o s is in th e c o u n tryleg a lly , h e h a s a n Im m ig ra tio n h o ld agai ns thi m . Fi nal l y , on t he natur e and s er i ous nes s of the dange r fa ctor, his crim inal h ist o ryreflects prior o ffen ses o f a seriou s n ature and a record of p robat i on viol at i on s. Id. at84. T he courtconcl uded i t s anal y s i s w i th the fol l ow i ng det erm i nat i on: “W i t h t hes e fa ct or s i n m i nd, t he C our ts ees no condi t i ons orcombi nat i on of condi t i ons t hatw i l l r eas onabl yas s ur e C os ’ appea r ance oral l evi at e the r i s k that hi s r el eas e w i l l pos e t o t he comm uni ty . ” Id. a t 8 5 .-6- III M r . C os as s ert s t hatt he di s tr i ctcour terr ed i n thr ee w ay s i n det erm i ni ng t hathe s houl d be det ai ned pendi ng appea l . H i s fi r s tar gum enti s thatthe di s tr i ct cour tfai l ed t o acc or d pr operw ei ghtt o the ext ended l ength of t i m e thatM r . C os h a s s p e n t in d e ten tio n a n d fa iled to c o n sid e r th e d u e p ro c e ss im p lica tio n s o f h is pr ol onged pr etr i al det ent i on. W e w i l l cons i derthi s ar gum entl as t . T he s econd ar gum enti s t hatt he di s t r i ctcour tdi d notacc or d pr operw ei ghtt o i t s s uppr es s i on or der . T he thi r d ar gum enti s t hatthe di s tr i ctcour tdi d notconducta pr oper eval uat i on of the § 3142 fa ct or s i n m aki ng i t s det ent i on deci s i on. T he Suppr es s i on O r der M r . C os ar gues t hatt he di s tr i ctcour ts houl d have tr eat ed i t s s uppr es s i on order w i t h m ore si gn i fi cance . U nd er § 314 2(g)( 2), the d i stri ctcou rtm ust cons i dert he w ei ghtof the evi dence agai ns tthe per s on as a fa ct ori n the det ent i on det erm i nat i on. A s t he di s t r i ctcour texpl ai ned i n i t s M ay2006 or der , al though t he s uppr es s i on or derm ayhave i m pact ed thi s fac t or , the fa ct ori t s el f s houl d notbe gi ven much w ei ghtbeca us e of the governm ent ’ s appea l and the fa ctthatthe gun i s s t i l l avai l abl e as pos s i bl e evi dence . T he onl yi s s ue i s w hetherornotthe gun w ill b e a d m iss ib le a t trial. In a d e ten tio n h e a rin g , the d istric t co u rt is p e rm itt e d to c o n s id e r t h e e v id e n c e s o u g h t to b e s u p p re s s e d a s if it w e re a d m is s ib le . See 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 1 4 2 (f) (“ T h e ru les c o n c e rn in g th e a d m iss ib ili tyo f e v id e n c e in cr i m i nal t r i al s do notappl yt o t he pr es ent at i on and cons i der at i on of i nform at i on at-7-

th e [ d e ten tio n ] h e a rin g .”). C o n se q u e n tly , the d istric t co u rt d id n o t er r in its cons i der at i on of thi s fac t or . I tw as appr opr i at e t o dow npl aythe s i gni fi canc e of t he s uppr es s i on or derbynot i ng thatthe gun i s s t i l l avai l abl e as pos s i bl e evi dence . E v alua ti o n o f th e § 3 1 4 2 (g) F ac tors M r . C os ar gues t hatt he di s tr i ctcour terr ed i n i t s eval uat i on of the § 3142( g) fac t or s . W i t h r es pectt o the fi r s tfac t or , i n i t s M ay2006 or der , the di s t r i ctcour tnot ed thatr egar dl es s of the s uppr es s i on or der , “[t ] he natur e and the c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f

th e o ffe n s e c h a rg e d re m a in u n c h a n g e d .” A p lt. A p p . a t 8 4 . A lth o u g h w e a g re e w ith M r. C o s th a t th e fe lo n -in -p o ss e ss io n c h a rg e is n o t a c ri m e o f v io le n c e fo r p u rp o s e s o f th e B a il R e fo rm A c t, se e Un itedS ta tes v . In g le , 454 F. 3d 1082, 1084- 86 ( 10t h C i r . 2006) , i tdoes i nvol ve a l oaded f i r earm and the ci rcum st ances l eading t o the offen se i nv olved t he ex ecuti on of a st at e arr est w a rra n t w ith a lleg a tio n s o f a v io len t n a tu re . A s th e d istric t co u rt n o ted , “[ t]h is cas e ar i s es outof an a r r es tw arr antforK i dnapi ng, A ggr avat ed A s s aul t , and A ggr avat ed A s s aul tw i t h a D eadl yW eapon. T he al l egat i ons ar e that , i n an a p p a re n t jea lo u s ra g e , C o s a ttem p ted to sta b h is e x -g irlfr ien d a n d a m a le i ndi vi dual , and the tw o vi ct i m s t ook coveri ns i de a pa r ked vehi cl e. ” A pl t . A pp. at 1 4 7 -48 . D u ri n g the s tat e’s a tt em p t t o ex ec u te th e a rrest w arran t, the o fficers d isco v ere d the lo ad ed firearm u n d er the b ed in M r. C o s’ ap artm en t. W e the refo re a g re e th a t th e c irc u m sta n c e s le a d in g to th e fe lo n -in -p o ss e ss io n c h a rg e w e ig h in fa v o r o f d e ta in in g M r. C o s p e n d in g th e g o v e rn m e n t’ s a p p e a l.-8-

W i t h r egar d t o t he s econd fact or , the w ei ghtof the evi dence agai ns tthe per s on, w e have al r eadynot ed thatforpurpos es of the det ent i on hear i ng, “[t ] he ru les c o n c e rn in g th e a d m iss ib ili tyo f e v id e n c e in c rim in a l trials d o n o t ap p lyto t he pr es ent at i on and cons i der at i on of i nform at i on atthe [de t ent i on] hear i ng. ” 18 U . S. C . § 3142( f) . B eca us e the di s coveryof the fi r earm i s i nform at i on t hat m aybe cons i der ed att he det ent i on hear i ng r egar dl es s of i t s admi s s i bi l i tyas evi dence i n t he cr i m i nal t r i al , t hi s fac t oral s o w ei ghs i n favorof det ai ni ng M r. C o s p e n d in g a p p e a l. T he thi r d fac t ori nvol ves cons i der at i on of the hi s t or yand cha r act er i s t i cs of t he per s on, i ncl udi ng: (A ) th e p e rso n ’s c h a ra c ter , p h y sic a l an d m e n tal c o n d iti o n , fa m ily t i es , empl oym ent , fi nanci al r es our ces , l ength of r es i dence i n the comm uni t y , comm uni t yt i es , pas tconduct , hi s t oryr el at i ng t o drug or al cohol abus e, cr i m i nal hi s t ory , and r ecor d conce rni ng appea r ance at courtpr ocee di ngs ; and ( B ) w hether , att he t i m e of the curr entoffe ns e orarr es t , the per s on w a s o n p ro b a tio n , o n p a ro le, o r o n o th e r re lea se p e n d in g trial, s ent enci ng, appea l , orcompl et i on of s ent ence foran offens e under F e d e r a l , S t a t e , o rl o c a l l a w. Id. § 3142( g) ( 3) . T he di s t r i ctcour tconcl uded thatM r . C os ’ hi s t oryand char act er i s t i cs r ai s e a s i gni fi cantr i s k of non- appea r ance . W e agr ee. A s the di s t r i ctcour tnot ed, t her e i s veryl i t t l e i nform at i on aboutM r . C os ’ fami l y , about w hat he i s doing i n the com m un i ty , abo ut hi s em ploym ent, and abo ut hi s fi nan ces.-9-

M or eover , he has a pr i ors t at e courtconvi ct i on fordrug tr aff i cki ng and he v io la te d th e te rm s o f

h is p a ro le fo r t h a t v io la tio n o n s e v e ra l o c c a s io n s . F inally , o n the n ature an d seriou sn ess o f th e d an g er fac tor, the d istri ct co u rt reit era ted th at M r. C o s’ crim inal h ist o ryreflects prior o ffen ses o f a seriou s n ature a n d a re c o rd o f

p ro b a tio n v io latio n s. T h e c o u rt sta ted : C os ’ t w o pr i ordrug convi ct i ons , atl eas tone of w hi ch i nvol ves t r aff i cki ng, al s o cont i nue t o conce rn the C our t , es peci al l yi n l i ghtof C os ’ pos s es s i on of a l oaded f i r earm . T he pi ctur e thatthe C our thas of C os , gi ven the evi dence i n the r ecor d, i s thathe enga ges i n drug t r aff i cki ng act i vi t i es . C os ’ conductr evea l s an i ndi vi dual w ho has re f u s e d to re fo rm h is c ri m in a l w a y s . A p lt. A p p . at 1 4 8 . In a d d iti o n to M r. C o s’ c rim in a l h isto ry , the re c o rd re flec ts th a t a s c a le– o f

th e k in d typ ica llya ss o c iate d w ith d ru g tra ffick in g – a n d $ 5 0 0 in c a s h w e re fo u n d d u ri n g th e s e a rc h o f M r. C o s ’ a p a rt m e n t a f te r h is a rr e s t. Id. at 156- 58. W e aga i n agr ee w i t h t he di s tr i ctcour tthatthi s fac t orw ei ghs i n favorof det ai ni ng M r . C os pendi ng appea l . T he di s tr i ctcour tdi d noterri n i t s eval uat i on o f th e § 3 1 4 2 (g ) fa c to rs a n d its d e c isio n to d e tain M r. C o s p e n d in g a p p e a l. L ength of Pr etr i al D et ent i on A t th e tim e o f

th e h e a rin g o n th e m o tio n fo r re lea se p e n d in g a p p e a l, M r. C o s h a d b e e n d e tain e d fo r a lm o st 1 4 m o n th s, sin c e Ju n e 2 9 , 2 0 0 5 . In h is m ot i on, M r . C os as s ert ed that , i n l i ghtof the l ength of hi s pr etr i al det ent i on, gr eat erj us t i fi cat i on forhi s cont i nued det ent i on w as r equi r ed underthe D ue Pr oces s C l aus e. M r . C os cont ended thathi s s ent ence m aybe as s hor tas-10-

27 m ont hs and he ha s now al r eadys erved hal f of thatt i m e. M or eover , he ar gued th a t “ ‘w h e n th e a d m is s ib ility o f a ll e v id e n c e a g a in s t d e fe n d a n ts is q u e s tio n a b le , [

. . . ] pr ol onged pr etr i al det ent i on m us tbe s ubj ect ed t o m or e ca r eful s crut i nythan m i ghtot herw i s e be r equi r ed. ’ ” A pl t . A pp. at92 ( quot i ng Uni t ed Stat es v. Shar eef , 907 F. Supp. 1481, 1485 ( D . K an. 1995) ) . T he di s tr i ctcour tdi d not add res s this du e process ar gu m ent i n it s orderden y i ng the m oti on for r el ease p en d ing ap p ea l. M r. C o s arg u es th at th is w as e rror. A di s t r i ctcour ti s notr equi r ed t o cons i derthe l ength of pr etr i al det ent i on w h e n m a k in g its in itia l d e te n tio n d e c is io n . C f. 18 U . S. C . § 3142; Uni t ed Stat es v. A ccet t uro , 783 F. 2d 382, 388 ( 3d C i r . 1986) ( decl i ni ng t o hol d B ai l R eform A ct uncons t i tut i onal forom i t t i ng t he dur at i on of pr etr i al i ncar cer at i on fr om the fa c to rs to b e c o n s id e re d b yth e ju d ic ia l o ffic e r i n th e d e te n tio n d e te rm in a tio n ). T he courti n A ccet t uro w e n t o n to e x p lain h o w e v e r, th a t: W e agr ee w i t h t he Second Ci r cui tthatats om e poi ntdue pr oces s m ay requi re a r el ease from pretri al detent i on or, ata m i nim um , a fresh p ro c e e d in g a t w h ich m o re is re q u ire d o f th e g o v e rn m e n t th a n is m a n d a ted b yse c tio n 3 1 4 2 . T h u s, a d e ter m in a tio n u n d e r th e B a il R eform A ctt hatdet ent i on i s nece s s aryi s w i thoutpr ej udi ce t o a defe nd ant pet i t i on i ng for r el ease ata subseq uen tt i m e on du e process g ro u n d s . Id. ; s ee als o Shar eef

, 9 0 7 F . S u p p . at 1 4 8 3 -8 4 (re o p e n in g d e ten tio n h e a rin g to e x a m in e th e d u e p ro c e s s im p lic a tio n s o f th e c o n tin u e d d e te n tio n o f d e fe n d a n ts ). B e c a u se M r. C o s’ m o tio n fo r re lea se p e n d in g a p p e a l w a s a k in to a m o tio n to r eopen hi s det ent i on hear i ng, i tw as appr opr i at e forM r . C os t o as s er thi s due-11-

pr oces s ar gum ent . T he di s t r i ctcour ts houl d have rul ed on thati s s ue. O n r emand, t he di s t r i ctcour ts houl d cons i der : 1) the l ength of det ent i on; 2) the ext entof the pr os ecut i on’ s r es pons i bi l i t yfort he del ayof tr i al ; and 3) the s tr ength of the e v id e n c e u p o n w h ic h th e d e te n tio n w a s b a s e d . See Uni t ed Stat es v. Mi l lan , 4 F. 3d 1 0 3 8 , 1 0 4 3 -10 4 7 (2d C ir . 1 9 9 3 ). IV B eca us e the r ecor d s uppor t s the di s tr i ctcour t ’ s fi ndi ngs and ther e w as no l egal err or , w e A FFIRM t he dec i s i on of the di s tr i ctcour tdeny i ng r el eas e pendi ng app eal . W e R E M A N D for the d i stri ctcou rtt o co nsi der the d ue p rocess im p lica tio n s o f

th e len g th o f

M r. C o s’ p re trial d e ten tio n . T h e u n d e rly in g a p p e a l, N o . 0 6 -2 1 8 7 , Uni t ed Stat es v. C os , w i l l be expe di t ed. T he ca s e w i l l be pl ace d on t he nextavai l abl e docke tand no ext ens i ons w i l l be gr ant ed on the br i efi ng s c h e d u le . ENT ERE D FOR T HE COURT P E R C UR I AM