I attended two waivers of indictment, arraignment and change of plea cases. The cases involved the U.S. versus Hakob Sergoyan and the U.S. versus Stanislav Sarber. They both where tried for the same crime, and ended up presenting themselves to the Judge at the same time, but with different attorneys. In their arraignment, the judge went over their rights and the different things they may do to defend themselves. Shortly after the prosecutor went over their charges and some of the facts to the case. In the end, they both made guilty pleas. The judge then asked the prosecutor whether to remand the case or keep the defendants out of custody until there trial. The prosecutor in due course decided to keep them out of custody until there next trial. …show more content…
This case involved the U.S. versus Nicholas Votaw. He was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, which he plead guilty. He was originally presented with the consequences of pleading guilty and basically what could happen if he plead guilty. He voluntarily pleas guilty, giving up some of his rights that are originally granted before pleading guilty. The judge then proceeded to ask the defendant basic questions about his career and his involvements in the past couple of days, before laying out the case and case number to the defendant. He was then read his Miranda rights and his rights at trial. Nicholas Votaw was also granted the right to remain out of jail until his trial as long as he didn’t violate any laws or else his case would be