Filed: Nov. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 01, 2018
Summary: ORDER & REASONS IVAN L.R. LEMELLE , Senior District Judge . Before the Court are Defendants' Motion to Expedite Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Continue Trial (Rec. Doc. 504), Defendants' Motion to Continue Trial (Rec. Doc. 503), Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum (Rec. Doc. 508), and Government's Memorandum in Opposition (Rec. Doc. 512). Accordingly, With multiple sets of defense counsel, investigator, paralegal, all cooperatively sharing and dividing up trial preparatory work, includi
Summary: ORDER & REASONS IVAN L.R. LEMELLE , Senior District Judge . Before the Court are Defendants' Motion to Expedite Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Continue Trial (Rec. Doc. 504), Defendants' Motion to Continue Trial (Rec. Doc. 503), Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum (Rec. Doc. 508), and Government's Memorandum in Opposition (Rec. Doc. 512). Accordingly, With multiple sets of defense counsel, investigator, paralegal, all cooperatively sharing and dividing up trial preparatory work, includin..
More
ORDER & REASONS
IVAN L.R. LEMELLE, Senior District Judge.
Before the Court are Defendants' Motion to Expedite Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Continue Trial (Rec. Doc. 504), Defendants' Motion to Continue Trial (Rec. Doc. 503), Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum (Rec. Doc. 508), and Government's Memorandum in Opposition (Rec. Doc. 512). Accordingly,
With multiple sets of defense counsel, investigator, paralegal, all cooperatively sharing and dividing up trial preparatory work, including reviews of Jencks Act and other materials, and finding no justification for asserted claims of insufficient time to effectively prepare for trial of this 3-yearold case, the instant motion to continue trial is DENIED. The vast majority of discovery at issue has been produced in the early stages of this case. The majority of Jencks Act materials have been produced much earlier than normally required prior to trial. The remaining material is not voluminous in nature or content, and even if so, there is sufficient time for the defense teams to review same and effectively represent their respective clients. Further, there are additional opportunities at trial for effective review and preparation in this estimated month-long trial, especially in connection with any relevant and pertinent Jencks Act or Giglio evidence.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to expedite is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
