IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
May 19, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: B. Lynn WINMILLChief Judge United States District Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER FINDINGEXCLUDABLE TIMEUNDERTHESPEEDY
The Court has before it a Motion to Vacate Trial and for Finding of Excludable Time. The defendant requests additional time so that his counsel will have adequate time to prepare for trial.
Under all the circumstances of this case, the Court finds that a continuance is needed to give defense counsel an opportunity to provide an effective defense. Thus, a continuance is warranted under 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), which authorizes a finding of excludable time when the refusal to grant a continuance would "deny counsel for the defendant . . . the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation . . . ." Under these circumstances, the interests of justice in allowing the defense time for effective preparation outweighs the Defendant's and the public's interest in a speedy trial under 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A).
A reasonable delay to allow the defense time to prepare would place trial on July 18, 2011. The Court finds that the period of time between the motion for continuance and the new trial date is excludable time under the Speedy Trial Act.
In accordance with the Memorandum Decision above, NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Motion to Vacate Trial and for Finding of Excludable Time (docket no. 92) filed by Defendant be, and the same is hereby, GRANTED, and that the present trial date be VACATED, and that a new trial be set for July 18, 2011, at 1:30 p.m. in the Federal Courthouse in Boise, Idaho.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the period of time between the filing of the Motion to Vacate and the new trial date be deemed EXCLUDABLE TIME under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A).
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.