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. McDaniel

January 22, 2007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SHAWN MCDANIEL, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: District Judge Susan J. Dlott

ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Continue Deadline for All Pleadings (doc. 37) related to Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence (doc. 18). For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion.

Following the Court's January 11, 2007 hearing on Defendant McDaniel's Motion to Suppress Evidence, the Court ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefs in support of their respective positions, setting a deadline of January 17 for Defendant and January 24 for Plaintiff. On January 16, 2007, counsel for the United States of America advised Defendant that the government had located additional discoverable evidence. Specifically the government located a videotape of a portion of the events that occurred on the night of McDaniel's arrest as well as an audio tape of the arresting officers' radio transmissions.

Defendant requests that this Court continue the deadlines for filing supplemental briefs on Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence so that Defendant may have a sufficient amount of time to review the newly discovered evidence. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A), pursuant to a defendant's motion for a continuance or on its own motion, a court may grant a continuance that is excludable from the speedy trial clock if the court finds that "the ends of justice served by [continuing the trial] outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial." One factor "which a judge shall consider in determining whether to grant such a continuance" is "whether the failure to grant such a continuance . . . would deny counsel for the defendant . . . the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation." See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). In the instant case, the newly discovered evidence may be material and relevant to Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence. A continuance is warranted to ensure that Defendant has an adequate amount of time to prepare an effective defense.

Thus, the Court finds under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that the ends of justice would be served by granting a continuance of the trial date. The Court further finds that Defendant's right to effective representation and an adequate presentation of his defense outweighs the best interest of Defendant and the public in a speedy trial.

The Court hereby VACATES the January 17 and January 24, 2007 pleading deadlines.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Susan J. Dlott United States District Judge

20070122

© 1992-2007 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.