Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Girard, 2018-30. (2020)

Court: District Court, D. Virgin Islands Number: infdco20200124h99 Visitors: 23
Filed: Jan. 23, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 23, 2020
Summary: ORDER CURTIS V. G MEZ , District Judge . This case commenced on September 13, 2018, when the Grand Jury returned a seven-count indictment against three defendants. Since then, the Grand Jury has returned several superseding indictments that added additional defendants and charges. On January 17, 2019, the Grand Jury returned a Third Superseding Indictment charging eleven defendants with 47 counts. After each defendant had been arraigned, the trial in this matter was first set for April 29
More

ORDER

This case commenced on September 13, 2018, when the Grand Jury returned a seven-count indictment against three defendants. Since then, the Grand Jury has returned several superseding indictments that added additional defendants and charges.

On January 17, 2019, the Grand Jury returned a Third Superseding Indictment charging eleven defendants with 47 counts. After each defendant had been arraigned, the trial in this matter was first set for April 29, 2019. Thereafter, on April 5, 2019, the Court entered an order granting the motion of the United States to extend the time within which the trial in this matter must be initiated. In that order, the Court set the trial for July 29, 2019.

On April 25, 2019, the Grand Jury returned a Fourth Superseding Indictment. Subsequently, trial was set for September 23, 2019.

On July 31, 2019, the Court entered an order extending the time within which the trial in this matter must be initiated. On the same date, the Court set the trial for December 3, 2019. Thereafter, the Court set several new dates. Ultimately, on December 4, 2019, the Court set the trial in this matter for February 18, 2020. In the same order, the Court set January 8, 2020, as the date by which motions must be filed. In that order, the Court also scheduled a motions hearing for February 3, 2020.

Various Counsel in this case request continuances of the trial date and/or motions hearing date. In a case such as this, involving many defendants and covering many counts, the Court must be cognizant of the imperatives of the Speedy Trial Act and the rights of each defendant to a speedy trial. See, e.g., United States v. Rankin, 779 F.2d 956, 959-60 (3d Cir. 1986).

The premises considered, it is hereby

ORDERED that, by no later than 5:00 p.m. on January 27, 2020, each Counsel who has requested a continuance shall file a written document bearing the signature of each Counsel and such Counsel's respective client certifying the following: (1) that each Counsel has informed his or her respective client that a continuance is being sought on the client's behalf, which continuance, if granted, may be longer than what is requested; (2) that each Counsel's respective client who is incarcerated has been informed that such Defendant will remain incarcerated for the duration of any continuance that may be granted; (3) that each affected Defendant has been informed that the current trial date will be delayed if a continuance is granted; and (4) that each affected Defendant indicated to his or her Counsel that the respective Defendant agrees with such Counsel's efforts to seek a continuance; it is further

ORDERED that a status conference in this matter is hereby SCHEDULED to commence promptly at 10:00 A.M. on February 4, 2020, in St. Thomas Courtroom 1 before District Judge Curtis V. Gomez; and it is further

ORDERED that the omnibus hearing in this matter previously scheduled for February 3, 2020, is hereby RESCHEDULED to commence promptly at 9:00 A.M. on February 18, 2020.

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