Delphi Verified Motion To Extend Discovery Deadline
Delphi Verified Motion To Extend Discovery Deadline
Delphi Verified Motion To Extend Discovery Deadline
STATE OF INDIANA )
Plaintiff )
v. )
)
RICHARD ALLEN, )
Accused )
Comes now counsel for Attorneys Baldwin and Rozzi and respectfully move to extend
1. On February 22, 2004, the Court issued an order stating in pertinent part
“…now orders counsel for the defense attorneys to provide to the State of Indiana all the exhibits
intended to be introduced at the hearing on March 18, 2024, on or before March 7, 2024. The
Court did not issue a reciprocal order for the State to provide their exhibits expected to be
introduced.
Undersigned has provided expected exhibits to Mr. McLeland as they have become available.
The undersigned believes Mr. McLeland has provided all expected exhibits available to him
witnesses. At that time, it was learned that the ISP report provided to Mr. McLeland then the
undersigned did not contain the attachments. Mr. McLeland pledged to obtain them and share.
4. Also during the depositions it was learned that Sgt. Holeman had conducted recorded
interviews with pertinent people. It is not yet known if those were the omitted attachments to the
report. Again, Mr. McLeland assured the undersigned they would be produced.
5. On March 5, 2024, at 8:24 a.m. Mr. McLeland communicated to undersigned that he
had the attachments and would collect the interviews and provide them through discovery that
day. Then on March 6 at 9:23 p.m. Mr. McLeland advised that due to time constraints he would
6. Upon review of the State’s additional discovery the undersigned may have additional
exhibits. It will be impossible to determine that until the new materials are reviewed which, due
to counsel’s schedule, cannot be done before late in the afternoon of March 7, 2024.
7. On February 29, 2024, and March 1, 2024, the defense was contacted by two separate
individuals who claimed to have documents pertinent to leaks. Despite diligent efforts the
defense has not yet obtained these documents to be able to assess their credibility and reliability.
Upon doing so the defense may have additional exhibits, which of course will be provided to the
8. Time is certainly not of the essence because everything the State complains of
happened months ago, and was fully vetted. The Sate did not file its allegations of contemptible
conduct until after the Indiana Supreme Court reinstated Attorneys Baldwin and Rozzi. The issue
WHEREFORE, counsel respectfully prays the Court to extend the submission of exhibits
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/David R. Hennessy
VERIFICATION
I swear, under penalties for perjury, that the foregoing representations are true to the best
/s/David R. Hennessy
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing was served upon all counsels
DAVID R. HENNESSY
Attorney at Law
11715 Fox Road
Suite 400 #180
Indianapolis, IN 46236
(317) 636-6160
Attorney No. 8216-49
hen@indylaw4all.com