Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Adams

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


June 2, 2008

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
QUAWNTAY ADAMS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss Counts Three Through Six of the Third Superseding Indictment for Violation of the Speedy Trial Act, filed by defendant Quawntay Adams (Doc. 355). In this Motion, Defendant advances no new arguments or rationale, but instead, incorporates by reference his Supplemental Memorandum (Doc. 284), filed October 27, 2006, in support of his Reopened Motion to Dismiss Counts 1 and 2 of the Third Superseding Indictment (Doc. 253). Defendant additionally incorporates by reference his Writ of Mandamus with the Seventh Circuit, filed on August 8, 2007,*fn1 to support his instant argument that more than seventy non-excludable days have elapsed between February 19, 2004 and the commencement of his trial regarding Counts 3 through 6, in violation of the Speedy Trial Act.

On December 22, 2006, the Court issued its Order (Doc. 293) denying Defendant's Reopened Motion to Dismiss Counts 1 and 2 of the Third Superseding Indictment (Doc. 253), including his Supplemental Memorandum (Doc. 284). Defendant's instant Motion (Doc. 355) does not change the Court's prior rationale as to why it finds Defendant's arguments unavailing -- the Court finds no violation of the Speedy Trial Act regarding Defendant in this matter. Simply because Defendant now moves to dismiss Counts 3 through 6 of the Third Superseding Indictment rather than Counts 1 and 2 will not change the Court's previous analysis or Speedy Trial Act computations as stated in its prior Order (Doc. 293) denying the dismissal. Accordingly, the Court incorporates by reference its prior Order (Doc. 293), issued on December 22, 2006, denying Defendant's Reopened Motion to Dismiss Counts 1 and 2 of the Third Superseding Indictment (Doc. 253), including his supplemental memorandum (Doc. 284). In particular, the Court incorporates by reference its analysis, rationale and Speedy Trial Act computations, stated in its previous Order (Doc. 293), as the basis for DENYING Defendant's instant Motion to Dismiss Counts Three Through Six of the Third Superseding Indictment for Violation of the Speedy Trial Act (Doc. 355).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

David R Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.