Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Clayton, 18-00165 HG. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Hawaii Number: infdco20190516a19 Visitors: 4
Filed: May 15, 2019
Latest Update: May 15, 2019
Summary: ORDER FINDING GOOD CAUSE TO EXTEND BY AN ADDITIONAL 15 DAYS DEFENDANT'S COMMITMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN DETENTION CENTER FOR DETERMINATION OF MENTAL COMPETENCY HELEN GILLMOR , District Judge . On March 7, 2019, the Court filed an Order requiring Defendant Jerrell Clayton to submit to a mental competency examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4241. (ECF No. 34). The Order committed the Defendant to the custody of the Attorney General for a reasonable period, but not to exceed thirty (30) days.
More

ORDER FINDING GOOD CAUSE TO EXTEND BY AN ADDITIONAL 15 DAYS DEFENDANT'S COMMITMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN DETENTION CENTER FOR DETERMINATION OF MENTAL COMPETENCY

On March 7, 2019, the Court filed an Order requiring Defendant Jerrell Clayton to submit to a mental competency examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241. (ECF No. 34). The Order committed the Defendant to the custody of the Attorney General for a reasonable period, but not to exceed thirty (30) days.

On April 26, 2019, the Court received a letter dated April 12, 2019, from John T. LeMaster, Acting Warden of the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC), Los Angeles, CA, requesting a 15-day extension to complete the testing and evaluation of Defendant Clayton. (ECF No. 37).

The Court finds that there has been a showing of good cause that the additional time is necessary to observe and evaluate Defendant. The Court finds:

1. Defendant arrived at the MDC on April 5, 2019. 2. The clinical psychologist conducting the examination of Defendant at MDC has requested an additional 15 days to complete the testing and examination necessary to develop a history, diagnosis, and opinion.

The Court grants the request for extension until May 20, 2019 in order to complete the report, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4247(b).

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendants in a speedy trial. Failure to grant the continuance would unreasonably deny time necessary for effective preparation of the evaluation of Defendant, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court ORDERS that the period of time for the examination herein requested be excluded from computation, pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7).

IT IS 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