Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

United States v. Warshak

October 19, 2006

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
STEVEN E. WARSHAK, ET AL.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: S. Arthur Spiegel United States Senior District Judge

OPINION AND ORDER

The Court held a pretrial conference in this matter on Tuesday, October 17, 2006. Counsel for all parties were present.

At such conference, the parties discussed Defendants' Motion to Waive Speedy Trial Provisions and Declare This Matter Complex (doc. 41), which the government does not oppose. Defendants also orally requested an extension in the motion deadline in this matter. For the reasons indicated herein, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Waive Speedy Trial Provisions, DECLARES this Matter Complex, and GRANTS Defendants' oral request to extend the motion deadline, until February 1, 2007, at 1:00 P.M., at which time it SETS a status conference.

Defendants Steven Warshak, Harriet Warshak, Paul Kellogg, Charles W. Clarke, Jr., Steven P. Pugh, Amar D. Chavan, TCI Media, Inc., and Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, Inc., move the Court for an Order declaring that the speedy trial provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3161(c)(1) be waived, and this action be declared complex litigation (doc. 41). Defendants indicated in their motion, and at the October 17, 2006 status conference, that due to the large volume of discovery, some seven tons of documents, they need more time to review the entirety of discovery than that granted under the speedy trial provisions. The parties informed the Court that they are conducting discovery in good faith, and the government stated it has provided Defendants with a document index.

Defendants also indicate that the Indictment contains 112 counts, forfeiture allegations, and includes alleged offenses over a period of five years. The magnitude of the Indictment and the volume of discovery, argue Defendants, qualify this matter as complex under 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii).

Having reviewed this matter, the Court finds Defendants' Motion well-taken. The ends of justice by the granting of a continuance in this matter outweigh the best interests of the public and the Defendants in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(8)(A). The Court finds that the exceptionally large volume of discovery, the number of Defendants, and the multi-count Indictment qualify this matter as complex. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii). It would be unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the speedy trial time limits. Id. Having found it appropriate to grant Defendants' Motion to Declare this Matter Complex, the Court further finds it in the interests of justice to permit Defendants to file pretrial motions up to the time of the next status conference.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Waive Speedy Trial Provisions and Declare This Matter Complex (doc. 41), DECLARES this Matter Complex, and GRANTS Defendants' oral request to extend the motion deadline, which the Court extends until February 1, 2007, at 1:00 P.M., at which time it SETS a status conference, and at which time it shall set a trial date.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 19, 2006

20061019

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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