U.S. v. GAY, 1:13-00001. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20140430839
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 26, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2014
Summary: ORDER KEVIN H. SHARP, District Judge. At the March 24, 2014 status conference, the Court granted Defendant Gay's Motion to Sever Trial from that of His Codefendants (Docket No. 103) and Defendant Heidekker's Motion from Relief from Prejudicial Joinder (Docket No. 106). Also, at the hearing the Court granted Defendant Wooten's oral motion to continue the trial in which Defendants Hardiman and Heidekker joined. These Defendants have also filed a Waiver of Speedy Trial and have agreed to have th
Summary: ORDER KEVIN H. SHARP, District Judge. At the March 24, 2014 status conference, the Court granted Defendant Gay's Motion to Sever Trial from that of His Codefendants (Docket No. 103) and Defendant Heidekker's Motion from Relief from Prejudicial Joinder (Docket No. 106). Also, at the hearing the Court granted Defendant Wooten's oral motion to continue the trial in which Defendants Hardiman and Heidekker joined. These Defendants have also filed a Waiver of Speedy Trial and have agreed to have the..
More
ORDER
KEVIN H. SHARP, District Judge.
At the March 24, 2014 status conference, the Court granted Defendant Gay's Motion to Sever Trial from that of His Codefendants (Docket No. 103) and Defendant Heidekker's Motion from Relief from Prejudicial Joinder (Docket No. 106). Also, at the hearing the Court granted Defendant Wooten's oral motion to continue the trial in which Defendants Hardiman and Heidekker joined. These Defendants have also filed a Waiver of Speedy Trial and have agreed to have their trial reset at the conclusion of the trial as to Defendant Gay.
The April 1, 2014 trial for Defendant Gay is hereby rescheduled for Thursday, April 10, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. where the parties have indicated their intentions to proceed on stipulated facts. The trial as to remaining Defendants will be reset after the conclusion of Gay's trial.
The Court finds that the ends of justice will be best served by a continuance of this action, and such continuance outweighs the best interest of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial. Accordingly, the period of time from April 1, 2014, through the resetting of the trials for Defendants Hardiman, Wooten and Heidekker is excluded from the computation of time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Amendments Act of Title 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7).
It is so ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
