IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
June 16, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
CONRAD J. WYNN, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge
Before the Court is a motion to continue trial setting submitted by Conrad J. Wynn (Doc. 21). Defendant argues that he needs further time to discuss his available options with defense counsel since the Government has notified Defendant of its intention to seek an enhanced sentence upon conviction. Defendant further argues that defense counsel has met with Defendant twice but that his counsel needs additional time to meet with Defendant to discuss his options. Defendant further argues that if his case proceeds to trial he would need additional time for an investigator to conduct witness interviews and investigate the Government's allegations. The Government does not oppose the continuance. The Court, being fully advised in the premises, finds that Defendant Wynn needs additional time to prepare for trial. To force the Defendant to trial without adequate time to prepare would constitute a miscarriage of justice. In addition, the Court finds that pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the ends of justice served by the granting of such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and Defendant Wynn in a speedy trial. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendant Wynn's motion to continue trial setting (Doc. 21) and CONTINUES the jury trial scheduled for July 6, 2009 until August 31, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. The time from the date Defendant Wynn's motion was filed, June 15, 2009 until the date on which the trial is rescheduled, August 31, 2009, is excludable time for the purposes of speedy trial.
Should either party believe that a witness will be required to travel on the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System (JPATS) in order to testify at the trial of this case, a writ should be requested at least two months in advance.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DavidRHer|do| Chief Judge United States District Court
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.