Filed: Feb. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2018
Summary: ORDER JOHN C. COUGHENOUR , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Darryl Kilgore, Elizabeth Evans, Robin Perry, and Stacy Quarto's unopposed motion to continue the pretrial motions filing date and trial date (Dkt. No. 126). Having considered the motion, the defendants' speedy trial waivers, and the relevant record, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion and FINDS as follows: (a) In light of the circumstances presented in the defendants' motion, failure to grant a con
Summary: ORDER JOHN C. COUGHENOUR , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Darryl Kilgore, Elizabeth Evans, Robin Perry, and Stacy Quarto's unopposed motion to continue the pretrial motions filing date and trial date (Dkt. No. 126). Having considered the motion, the defendants' speedy trial waivers, and the relevant record, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion and FINDS as follows: (a) In light of the circumstances presented in the defendants' motion, failure to grant a cont..
More
ORDER
JOHN C. COUGHENOUR, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Darryl Kilgore, Elizabeth Evans, Robin Perry, and Stacy Quarto's unopposed motion to continue the pretrial motions filing date and trial date (Dkt. No. 126). Having considered the motion, the defendants' speedy trial waivers, and the relevant record, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion and FINDS as follows:
(a) In light of the circumstances presented in the defendants' motion, failure to grant a continuance in this proceeding would likely result in a miscarriage of justice, as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i);
(b) taking into account the exercise of due diligence, a failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation due to counsel's need for more time to review considerable evidence and to conduct necessary investigation to prepare an appropriate defense for this complex case, as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii);
(c) the additional time requested is a reasonable period of delay, as the defendant has requested more time to prepare for trial, to investigate the matter, to gather evidence material to the defense, and to consider possible defenses;
(d) the ends of justice will best be served by a continuance, and the ends of justice outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in any speedier trial, as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A);
(e) the additional time requested between the current trial date of March 12, 2018 and the new trial date is necessary to provide counsel for the defendant the reasonable time necessary to prepare for trial, considering the scope of discovery and complexity of the case; and
(f) the period of delay from the date of this order to the new trial date is excludable time pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (h)(7)(B)(iv).
The Court therefore ORDERS that the trial date in this matter shall be continued to August 13, 2018 and that pretrial motions shall be filed no later than July 6, 2018.
