Filed: Dec. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 18, 2018
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER MYRON H. THOMPSON , District Judge . This case is before the court on defendant Cedric Wright's unopposed motion to continue trial. For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that jury selection and trial, now set for February 4, 2019, should be continued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7). While the granting of a continuance is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, see United States v. Stitzer, 785 F.2d 1506 , 1516 (11th Cir. 1986), the court is limit
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER MYRON H. THOMPSON , District Judge . This case is before the court on defendant Cedric Wright's unopposed motion to continue trial. For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that jury selection and trial, now set for February 4, 2019, should be continued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7). While the granting of a continuance is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, see United States v. Stitzer, 785 F.2d 1506 , 1516 (11th Cir. 1986), the court is limite..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.
This case is before the court on defendant Cedric Wright's unopposed motion to continue trial. For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that jury selection and trial, now set for February 4, 2019, should be continued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7).
While the granting of a continuance is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, see United States v. Stitzer, 785 F.2d 1506, 1516 (11th Cir. 1986), the court is limited by the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The Act provides in part:
"In any case in which a plea of not guilty is entered, the trial of a defendant charged in an information or indictment with the commission of an offense shall commence within seventy days from the filing date (and making public) of the information or indictment, or from the date the defendant has appeared before a judicial officer of the court in which such charge is pending, whichever date last occurs."
§ 3161(c)(1). The Act excludes from the 70-day period any continuance based on "findings that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial." § 3161(h)(7)(A). In granting such a continuance, the court may consider, among other factors, whether the failure to grant the continuance "would be likely to . . . result in a miscarriage of justice," § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), or "would deny counsel for the defendant or the attorney for the Government the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence." § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
The court concludes that, in this case, the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the interest of the public and Wright in a speedy trial. Wright filed a motion to continue his hearing on his motion to suppress due to a witness's unavailability until on or after January 8, 2019. Wright represents that this witness is essential to the suppression issue. Because Wright needs additional time to resolve the suppression matter, the result of which, in turn, may require additional time to prepare for trial, the court concludes that a continuance is necessary to allow defense counsel an adequate opportunity to prepare effectively for trial. In addition, the government does not oppose the continuance, and the court finds no evidence of a lack of diligence.
* * *
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1) Defendant Cedric Wright's motion to continue (doc. no. 24) is granted.
(2) The jury selection and trial, now set for February 4, 2019, are continued to March 11, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2FMJ of the Frank M. Johnson Jr. United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama.
