Order Denying Defendant's Motions to Continue Sentencing and for Transcripts

[ECF Nos. 366-67]

JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.

After a seven-day trial, a jury found Brian Wright guilty of two counts each of Hobbs Act robbery, brandishing a firearm in furtherance of those robberies, and conspiracy.1 His sentencing was originally scheduled for March 18, 2019, but on January 30, I granted Wright an extension of time to file a Rule 29 motion and therefore continued the sentencing to April 15.2 On February 26, Wright moved the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the sentencing in this case and another case of his before me so that he could petition for a Writ of Mandamus.3 I issued an order on March 1 to make clear that Wright's April 15 sentencing in this case would proceed as scheduled unless the Ninth Circuit stayed proceedings.4 The Ninth Circuit eventually denied his motion, emphasizing that "there is a compelling interest in the prompt resolution of criminal actions."5

On March 14, Wright moved to continue his sentencing for 60 days, asserting that unspecified family members in California need additional time to schedule their travel and vacation days from work to attend the April 15 sentencing.6 I ordered a response from the government, which opposed the motion, describing it as "yet another attempt by the Defendant to delay the proceedings without a proper basis to do so."7 I agree with this characterization of Wright's request given that he knew of the April 15 sentencing date for six weeks before he filed his motion and given his history of delaying sentencing in this case and the 142-assault case. Although I am sympathetic to Wright's desire to have family support during his sentencing, he hasn't provided a sufficient reason why any delay—let alone one for 60 days—is necessary to arrange travel from a neighboring state. And the two-and-a-half-month span between continuing the sentencing hearing (at Wright's request) on January 30 and the April 15 hearing is more than sufficient to accommodate travel and work schedules. I therefore deny his motion to continue sentencing. If Wright's family is unable to attend sentencing, they may submit letters of support to the court, which I will consider as part of my sentencing decision.

I also deny Wright's motion for hearing and trial transcripts.8 As he acknowledges in his motion, I have explained to him on numerous occasions that he may request transcripts only after sentencing. Although he strangely asserts that I sentenced him on February 5, 2019, I have yet to sentence him in this case—as demonstrated by his contemporaneously filed motion to continue sentencing. I therefore also deny his motion for transcripts. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Wright's motion to continue sentencing and motion for transcripts [ECF Nos. 366-67] are DENIED. Wright's sentencing will proceed as scheduled on April 15, 2019, at 3:00 P.M.