Filed: Aug. 14, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2019
Summary: ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE RICHARD A. JONES , District Judge . Having heard argument of counsel on Defendant Diane Erdmann's oral motion to continue the trial date made in open court at a hearing conducted on August 13, 2019, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A). 2. Proceeding to trial absent adequat
Summary: ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE RICHARD A. JONES , District Judge . Having heard argument of counsel on Defendant Diane Erdmann's oral motion to continue the trial date made in open court at a hearing conducted on August 13, 2019, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A). 2. Proceeding to trial absent adequate..
More
ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE
RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge.
Having heard argument of counsel on Defendant Diane Erdmann's oral motion to continue the trial date made in open court at a hearing conducted on August 13, 2019, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
1. The ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
2. Proceeding to trial absent adequate time for the defense to prepare would result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i).
3. The defense needs additional time to explore issues of some complexity, including all relevant issues and defenses applicable to the case, which would make it unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for trial itself within the time limits established by the Speedy Trial Act and currently set for this case. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii).
4. Taking into account the exercise of due diligence, a continuance is necessary to allow the defendant the reasonable time for effective preparation of her defense. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
5. The Court, further finds, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(6), that the continuance of the trial date for Defendant Bernard Ross Hansen is also reasonable given the limited period of delay, the fact that there has been no motion to sever the defendants, and the fact that Defendant Hansen does not oppose the continuance.
6. Both defendants have executed and filed speedy trial waivers.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the trial date in this matter is continued to April 13, 2020, at 9:00 a.m.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period of delay from the date of this order through the new trial date of April 13, 2020, is hereby excluded for speedy trial purposes under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel are directed to meet and confer and present an amended proposed Order Setting Case Schedule for the Court's consideration, based on a trial date of April 13, 2020.
