Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Samp, 16-cr-20263. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20170301f29 Visitors: 4
Filed: Mar. 01, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RESCHEDULE FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING, AND DETERMINING EXCLUDABLE DELAY THOMAS L. LUDINGTON , District Judge . On April 14, 2016, Defendant Robert L. Samp was indicted on three counts of willfully failing to make an income tax return. On August 10, 2016, the Court granted Defendant Robert L. Samp's motion to substitute retained attorneys for his appointed counsel. Also on August 10, 2016, the Government issued a superseding indictment
More

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RESCHEDULE FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING, AND DETERMINING EXCLUDABLE DELAY

On April 14, 2016, Defendant Robert L. Samp was indicted on three counts of willfully failing to make an income tax return. On August 10, 2016, the Court granted Defendant Robert L. Samp's motion to substitute retained attorneys for his appointed counsel. Also on August 10, 2016, the Government issued a superseding indictment which charged Samp with the additional count of possessing a firearm while being an unlawful user of a controlled substance, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3). ECF No. 20. On February 22, 2017, a second superseding indictment was filed which altered Samp's alleged tax liability. ECF No. 47. On February 24, 2017, Samp filed a motion requesting that the final pretrial conference, currently scheduled for March 16, be rescheduled. ECF No. 48. In the motion, Samp represents that one of his counsel has a previous family commitment from March 16, 2017, to March 20, 2017.

On November 18, 2016, Samp filed a motion to enjoin the Government from prosecuting Count Four. ECF No. 30. In the motion, Samp refers to a provision in the most recent federal Consolidated Appropriation Act which bars the Department of Justice from spending funds to prevent "States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana." Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-113, § 542, 129 Stat. 2242, 2332-33 (2015). In United States v. McIntosh, 833 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 2016), the Ninth Circuit interpreted that provision as prohibiting federal prosecutors from prosecuting individuals for conduct that conformed with state medical marijuana laws, but that otherwise violated federal laws. To determine whether Samp was in strict compliance with Michigan's medical marijuana law, the Court held an evidentiary hearing over three days. The last day of the hearing was held on February 27, 2017. At the end of the hearing, the Court indicated that the parties would be directed to submit supplemental briefing on several issues related to the provisions of the Michigan medical marijuana law as they existed during the relevant timeframe. Specifically, the parties should address the legality of marijuana "edibles," the total amount of marijuana that could be legally possessed by patients and caregivers under the statute, whether the law required that marijuana for personal use be kept separate from marijuana for caregiving use, and whether the law required marijuana to be secured in a locked container. The parties are also directed to provide their calculation of the total amount of marijuana that was seized during the search of Samp's property. The Government is further directed to provide Inspector Hahn's report listing the items seized (and their weight), as well as any other supplemental reports which may be relevant and have been provided to Samp previously. The briefs should be no longer than ten pages.

The motion for an adjournment of the final pretrial conference will be granted. The final pretrial conference will be rescheduled to March 30, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. Further, the Court notes that there will be eight days left on Samp's Speedy Trial Act clock from the day that the pending motion for injunctive relief is entered. Because, depending on the decision in that order, the parties will need time to recalibrate their trial preparations, the Court finds that the ends of justice necessitate excluding the time from Samp's previously scheduled trial to the currently scheduled trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(i), (ii), and (iv). Given the amount of time that this case has been pending, however, future adjournments or exclusions are unlikely to be granted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant Samp's motion for an adjournment, ECF No. 48, is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that the Final Pretrial Conference is ADJOURNED to March 30, 2017, at 2:00 p.m.

It is further ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to submit supplemental briefing on the issues described above, of no more than ten pages, on or before March 10, 2017.

It is further ORDERED that the time period from January 10, 2017, to April 18, 2017, be EXCLUDED for the purpose of computing the time limits under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(i), (ii) & (iv).

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