Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Walters, 2:19-cr-51-KS-MTP. (2020)

Court: District Court, S.D. Mississippi Number: infdco20200110a13
Filed: Jan. 09, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 09, 2020
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION KEITH STARRETT , District Judge . THIS CAUSE IS BEFORE THE COURT on Motion for Reconsideration [42] filed by Wade Ashley Walters wherein he requests the Court to reconsider its Order [40] granting in part and denying in part Defendant's Motion [25] for Continuance, the Response [45] thereto, and Reply [46] and finds that the Movant has not established the grounds for reconsideration which are: 1. An intervening change in controlling law; 2. The av
More

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

THIS CAUSE IS BEFORE THE COURT on Motion for Reconsideration [42] filed by Wade Ashley Walters wherein he requests the Court to reconsider its Order [40] granting in part and denying in part Defendant's Motion [25] for Continuance, the Response [45] thereto, and Reply [46] and finds that the Movant has not established the grounds for reconsideration which are:

1. An intervening change in controlling law; 2. The availability of new evidence not previously available; and 3. The need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest justice.

Yesterday, January 7, 2020, this Court conducted a telephonic status conference with the parties. The Court made it clear what it expected of the parties including diligent effort to produce and review the discovery by both sides. The Court further made it clear that it expected the parties to work together, and if there was any question about reasonable cooperation, the Court expected a request for intervention. The Court further scheduled a subsequent telephonic status conference to determine the progress of the parties in providing reciprocal discovery and reasonable assistance in categorizing, reviewing, and interpreting the discovery. The Court made some additional findings it its original Order, and there has been no basis shown to establish that the findings were incorrect.

The trial of this case is set to begin April 6, 2020, which is over 90 days hence, and the Court sees no reason at this time for a continuance. The Court will continue to be involved in overseeing the progress and ensuring good faith compliance by both sides in moving toward the scheduled trial date and protecting the constitutional and statutory rights of the Defendant. Both sides need to roll up their sleeves, continue their diligent efforts and prepare for the trial as scheduled.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer