This person was charged with 3 felonys in May.
http://170.164.50.60/openaccess/criminal/defendantcharges.asp?casenumber=FMB008493&courtcode=X&defnbr=2242910&defseq=1&otnmseq=0&dsn=
The actions are on this link...
http://170.164.50.60/openaccess/criminal/actionlist.asp?action1=C&action2=H&relatedcases=Y&actioncount=2&courtcode=X&casenumber=FMB008493&defnbr=2242910&defseq=1&otnmseq=0&dsn=&submit=Display+Actions
Does that mean an arrest warrant was issued on 9/14?
2006-09-17 03:15:25 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The original arrest occurred back in May 2006. On Sept. 14, some type of amendment was made by the prosecutor and an arrest warrant was issued. The reason for the arrest warrant isn't clear from online information.
2006-09-17 07:29:18 · answer #1 · answered by Carl 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd read it to be a hearing without him present, to issue a bench warrant for his arrest on 3 counts of knowingly receiving stolen goods in excess of $400 value.
Which could mean he failed to show for a court appearance, or that it's taken the courts this long to actually process the case forward.
2006-09-17 03:32:16 · answer #2 · answered by KansasDragon 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Like going to jail with 3 felonys in may
2006-09-17 03:23:13 · answer #3 · answered by Cookies m 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's what it looks like.
2006-09-17 03:19:18 · answer #4 · answered by ☼Earthbound Misfit☼ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that seems to be the case.
2006-09-17 03:44:30 · answer #5 · answered by qwerty 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋