USA v. Silk

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
United States of America, 	)
) 	ORDER
Plaintiff, 	)
)
vs. 	)
)
Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr., 	) 	Case No. 1:13-cr-053
)
Defendant. 	)
The Indictment returned by the Grand Jury on March 26, 2013, contained a scrivener’s error,
to wit: it erroneously identified defendant as Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. rather than Samuel Bryce Silk,
Sr. At defendant’s initial appearance on April 18, 2013, the parties noted this scrivener’s error,
acknowledged that the charges set forth in the Indictment were against Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. and
agreed to proceed accordingly. Thereafter, the suffix “Jr.” was dropped from the case caption and
defendant was identified as either Samuel Bryce Silk or Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr.1 However, the suffix
“Jr.” was not similarly dropped from the docket sheet. This has created some confusion from an
administrative standpoint as there is another, different defendant by the name of Samuel Bryce Silk,
Jr. who has had a case pending before this court.
To avoid the potential for any further confusion, the case caption and docket sheet in the
above-entitled action shall be amended to reflect that Samuel Bryce Silk, Sr. is the named defendant.
The Clerk’s office need not go back and edit all of the docket text to reflect this amendment.
Likewise, the parties need not go back and amend anything they have filed with the court to date.
1 For example, defendant signed the plea agreement as Samuel B. Silk, Sr., see Doc. No. 22, and the
Judgment of Conviction identified defendant as Samuel B. Silk, see Doc. No 23.
1
Case 1:13-cr-00053-DLH Document 68 Filed 02/01/18 Page 1 of 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 1st day of February, 2018.
/s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr.
Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
2
Case 1:13-cr-00053-DLH Document 68 Filed 02/01/18 Page 2 of 2