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. Murrillo-Arriola

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO


October 14, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GUSTAVO MURRILLO-ARRIOLA, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable B. Lynn Winmill Chief U. S. District Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

The Court has before it Defendant's Motion to Continue (Dkt 16). Counsel for the Defendant indicates that he is attempting to arrange for several witnesses from Mexico to be present at trial. However, counsel acknowledges that it has been difficult to obtain visas for their appearance. Defendant therefore requests a continuance of 20 to 30 days.

Based on this information, and the Court's experience with parties attempting to obtain visas for witnesses from Mexico, the Court conducted an informal conference with counsel for the defendant and the Government. During that informal conference, the Court explained that it would grant such a continuance if the witness's testimony was critical and there was some likelihood that counsel could, if given additional time, procure their attendance. However, the Court indicated that it could not grant a continuance unless Defendant provided the Court, ex parte, with additional evidence about (1) the significance of the witnesses' testimony, (2) the willingness of the witnesses to travel to the United States, (3) the process by which he intends to obtain the visas or otherwise procure the witnesses for trial, and (4) his likelihood of success. Otherwise, a continuance would be fruitless, a waste of time, and against the interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). The Court asked counsel to supplement the record on the Motion to Continue with such evidence, or the case would proceed to trial as scheduled. Defendant did not file additional information. Accordingly, the Court will deny the motion.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED:

Defendant's Motion to Continue (Dkt. 16) is DENIED.

20101014

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



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.