United States v. Brown

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAW AN BROWN a/k/a “DB”

Court: United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Dec 13, 2022

Mag. 22-15138 (D.N.J. Dec. 13, 2022)

Opinion

Mag. 22-15138

12-13-2022

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAW AN BROWN a/k/a “DB”

Anthony Pope, Esq. Counsel for Defendant Dong Joo Lee Assistant United States Attorney Robert L. Frazer Assistant United States Attorney

HONORABLE EDWARD S. KIEL United States Magistrate Judge

Anthony Pope, Esq. Counsel for Defendant

Dong Joo Lee Assistant United States Attorney

Robert L. Frazer Assistant United States Attorney

ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE

HONORABLE EDWARD S. KIEL United States Magistrate Judge

This matter having been opened to the Court by Philip R. Sellinger, United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey (Assistant United States Attorneys Dong Joo Lee and Robert L. Frazer, appearing) and the defendant DA WAN BROWN a/k/a “DB” (Anthony Pope, Esq., appearing) for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in the above-captioned matter; and Defendant being aware that he has the right, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b), to have the matter presented to a Grand Jury within thirty (30) days of his arrest; and the Defendant through his attorney having consented to the continuance; and for good and sufficient cause shown, IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should be continued for the following reasons:

1. Plea negotiations currently are in progress, and both the United States and the Defendant seek additional time to achieve successful resolution of these negotiations, which would render trial of this matter unnecessary.

2. Defendant has consented to the aforementioned continuance. 1

3. The grant of a continuance will likely conserve judicial resources.

4. Pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7)(A), the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial.

WHEREFORE, it is on this 28th day of No v em b e r, 2022, ORDERED that the proceedings in the above-captioned matter are continued from the date of this order through January 31, 2023; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the aforementioned period shall be excludable in computing time under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974. 2