Comments on CAAFlog would suggest that members of the defense bar comprise the lion’s share of our readership. But it seems that at least one Code 46 counsel may be a reader as well.
Yesterday, in a comment to this post about Code 46’s motion to stay the effect of NMCCA’s writ of mandamus in Lawanson, Just Sayin’ observed that the motion argued that a stay was appropriate because the government was, according to its motion, likely to prevail at trial rather than likely to prevail on its writ appeal. Today, Code 46 filed this motion to correct errata asking to file a corrected motion for stay. Why?
The United States hereby informs the Court that the Government, in filing its Motion for Stay of Proceedings, incorrecdtly stated its likelihood of success on the merits rather than success on the pending Writ-Appeal, and respectfully moves to submit a new motion containing the correct argument.
We’ve posted that new motion here.