Plaintiff, ¥.

5eanna Quesenberry Defendant.

Pursuant to Local Rule 141(b), and based upon the representation contained in the Request to Seal filed by defendant Jeanna Quesenberry, [T ISHEREBY ORDEREDthatthe Defendant’s Supplemental filing submitted to this Court on March 7, 2025 and the Supporting Exhibits, along with the associated Request to Seal, shall be SEALED until further orderof this Court.

Dated: 3 il 25°

After a hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3148 (violation of pretrial release order), the court finds :

there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a federal, state or local crime while on release and defendant has not rebutted the presumption that his/her release will endanger another or the community or there is clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has violated another condition of release and based on the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g) there is no condition or combination of conditions of release that will assure that the defendant will not flee or pose a danger to the safety of another person or the community or the person is unlikely to abide by any condition or combination of conditions of release.

32.1(a)(6) and 46(c) and 18 U.S.C. § 3143 (violation of probation or supervised release) the court finds there is probable cause to believe defendant has violated a condition of probation or supervised release and the defendant has not met his/her burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that he/she will not flee or pose a danger to another person or to the community.

IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i)(2)-(4) defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.

The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with his/her counsel.

IT iS HEREBY ORDEREDthat the Request to Seal the defendant’s November 17, 2024 motion be granted so that personal information is not available on the public docket.

The Request and the filing are to be provided to the Court.

These documents shall remain under seal until further Order of the Court.

DATED: November@O , 2024 fueller Kim erly.

Unitad States District Judge Proposed Sealing Order Se~sDHCFBeOwlO

The government offered evidence that could show Mazza and Burhop were reluctant to complete the alleged murders, strongly preferred not to, and intended to avoid murder if possible, but understood nonetheless they would have to go ...

In Yandell’s view, the email proved the government was prosecuting him vindictively because he advocated for reforms within the California prison system, such as by leading a hunger strike against solitary confinement and gang validation policies.

One member of that group, Jeanna Quesenberry, was distributing large amounts of methamphetamine and heroin, and agents found evidence she was working in the community for Yandell, who was incarcerated in California state prison.

1 A snapshot of the page as it was available on January 26, 2024 is available on the internet archive via https://web.archive.org/web/20240126003206/https://nymag.com/news/ features/solitary-secure-housing-units-2014-2/ These threads came together in the summer of 2016, when Agent Nehring was exchanging recorded calls and text messages with Quesenberry under an assumed identity in an effort to collect evidence about her drug trafficking connections.

The government used the wiretaps to collect a great deal of evidence about the drug trafficking operation and the Aryan Brotherhood’s membership, leadership and efforts to exert influence within the California state prison system.

3 In Gomez-Lopez, the defense did offer the opinions of an expert sociologist, who opined that people with Latino surnames had been prosecuted at higher rates than others and concluded the difference could not be explained by random variation.

Defendant Brant Daniel, through counsel, and plaintiff United States, through counsel, hereby stipulate and request that the Court continue the deadline for defendant to file a reply brief to the government’s opposition to Mr. Daniel’s motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 from September 23, 2024 to October 7, 2024.

The reason for this request is that defense counsel needs additional time to consult with the defendant and prepare the reply brief.

Respectfully submitted,

IT IS HERBY ORDERED that the due date for defendant’s reply brief to the government’s opposition to defendant’s motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is continued to October 7, 2024 Dated: October 1, 2024.

Case No.: 2:19-CR-00107-KJM Defendant Kevin Macnamara’s Request And Order for Funds For Travel, Lodging, And Subsistence Pursuant To The Criminal Justice Act 18 U.S.C. §3006A

His caretaker will have to handle // Defendant Kevin Macnamara’s Request And Order For Funds For Travel, Lodging, And Subsistence Pursuant To The Criminal Justice Act 18 U.S.C. §3006A tasks such as bathing and dressing Mr. Macnamara.

Due Process Requires The Provision Of The Requested Funds Mr. Macnamara’s financial limitations were considered by the Court when a CJA panel attorney was appointed to him for representation in this case.

Defendant Kevin Macnamara’s Request And Order For Funds For Travel, Lodging, And Subsistence Pursuant To The Criminal Justice Act 18 U.S.C. §3006A

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, the Court orders the Federal Defender’s Office to disburse Criminal Justice Act (CJA) funds to furnish Kevin Macnamara with the travel expenses, lodging, food, and incidental expenses while he travels between La Palma, California and Sacramento, California between September 23, and 24, 2024 to attend a hearing in the above-captioned case for himself and a caretaker who is necessary due to Mr. Macnamara’s physical limitations as a