IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
April 5, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
CHARLES PRIESTLY, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge:
Pending before the Court is Defendant's second motion to continue trial setting (Doc. 25). Defendant maintains that he needs additional time to review discovery and to prepare for trial. The Government does not object. If refusing to grant a continuance in this matter "would unreasonably deny . . . counsel for the defendant . . . the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence," then a continuance is necessary. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Therefore, the Court finds that a continuance is necessary. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the Court finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and Defendant in a speedy trial.
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant's second motion to continue trial setting (Doc. 25) and CONTINUES the jury trial scheduled for April 25, 2011 to Tuesday, July 5, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. The time from the date the motion to continue trial was filed, April 5, 2011, to when the trial is rescheduled, July 5, 2011, is excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act.
Lastly, 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.
Digitally signed by David R. Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court
Date: 2011.04.05 10:21:25 -05'00'
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.