Case Information
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, v. CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 2:24-cr-00192-01 KISHA SUTTON,
Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Defendant’s Objections to Magistrate’s Order Denying Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Venue (Document 204), the Government’s Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Objections to Magistrate’s Order Denying Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Venue (Document 216), and the Defendant Kisha Sutton’s Reply to Response in Opposition (ECF 216) (Document 220).
Pursuant to the standard Order of Reference (Document 25) entered in this matter, the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Count Nine for Lack of Venue (Document 192), and the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Count Ten for Lack of Venue (Document 193), were referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge. [1] The Government responded to the Defendant’s motions in an Omnibus Response in Opposition to Defendant Kisha Sutton’s Motions to Dismiss (Document 201). Judge Aboulhosn held a hearing on the motions. The Defendant conceded at the hearing that venue had been adequately alleged as to Count One of the Superseding Indictment. Following the hearing, Judge Aboulhosn entered an Order (Document 203) deeming Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Count One for Lack of Venue (Document 184) moot and denying the remaining motions to dismiss.
Since Judge Aboulhosn entered his Order (Document 203), and before the Court could rule on the Defendant’s objections, the United States brought a Second Superseding Indictment (Document 245). Due to the substantive changes in the charges set forth in the Second Superseding Indictment, the Court finds that the Defendant’s pending motions to dismiss and objections are moot.
Wherefore, after thorough review and careful consideration, the Court ORDERS that the 1 In the Defendant’s filings, she repeatedly refers to Judge Aboulhosn as “the Magistrate.” As the title of United States Magistrate Judge suggests, Judge Aboulhosn and other magistrate judges are judges and should be referred to by that title.
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Count Nine for Lack of Venue Motion to Dismiss Count Ten for Lack of Venue (Document 193) and the Defendant’s Objections to Magistrate’s Order Denying Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Venue (Document 204) be TERMINATED as MOOT .
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to the Defendant and counsel, to the United States Attorney, to the United States Probation Office, and to the Office of the United States Marshal.
ENTER: June 16, 2025
