Opinion
Case No. 1:13cr50-(1), (2) and (6)
2013-10-18
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. STARLING GROVES, et al. Defendants.
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott
Ends of Justice Order
The indictment in this case charged six defendants with participating in a conspiracy to distribute narcotics. Three of the defendants have pled guilty. This order concerns the other three defendants: Starling Groves, Jack South, and Thomas Payne.
The Court conducted a status and scheduling conference regarding Mr. Payne on October 15, 2013. Attorney Kory Jackson, who was appointed as new defense counsel for Mr. Payne on September 25, 2013, stated that he had reviewed discovery, spoken with Defendant, and planned to have further discussions with Defendant regarding plea agreements proposed by the Government. Counsel requested additional time to allow continued discussions with the Government regarding a potential plea.
The following day, on October 16, the Court conducted a status and scheduling conference regarding Mr. Groves and Mr. South. At that time, defense counsel and counsel for the Government indicated that the parties were actively engaged in plea negotiations. They, too, requested a short amount of time to allow continued negotiations prior to trial.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(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." A court is to consider a number of factors in "determining whether to grant such a continuance," including: (a) "[w]hether the failure to grant such a continuance . . . would deny counsel for the defendant . . . the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation;" and (b) "[w]hether the failure to grant such a continuance . . . would . . . result in a miscarriage of justice." 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), (iv).
The Court is not limited to considering the factors listed in that statute. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B). Relevant to this case, the Sixth Circuit has held that time spent plea-bargaining is excludable from the time periods prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. See United States v. Dunbar, 357 F.3d 582, 593 (6th Cir. 2004) ("We have held that plea negotiations may be excluded as 'other proceedings' pursuant to § 3161(h)(1)."), rev'd in part on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1099 (2005).
When more than one defendant has been joined in a single prosecution, a period of delay attributable to one defendant, who has not been severed from other defendants, is attributable to the other defendants. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(6). The Sixth Circuit has stressed that there is only one speedy trial clock in multi-defendant prosecutions in which severance has not been granted. See United States v. Snelling, 961 F.2d 93, 95 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Culpepper, 898 F.2d 65, 66 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 856 (1990). In this case, all three Defendants who have not entered a plea of guilty have requested additional time to pursue potential plea agreements with the Government prior to trial, and the speedy trial clock calculation shall be the same for all these Defendants.
The Court finds under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) that the ends of justice would be served by granting a continuance in this case. Defendants Groves, South, and Payne are considering plea agreements proposed by the Government. The interests of these Defendants in engaging in plea negotiations and adequately preparing a defense if an agreement is not reached outweigh the best interests of Defendants and the public in a speedy trial. Accordingly, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the ends of justice are served by establishing a schedule that permits continued plea negotiations in advance of a trial.
The Court hereby schedules a change of plea hearing for November 5, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. for Defendant Payne. If Mr. Payne and the Government have not reached a plea agreement prior to that time, the Court will set the matter for a jury trial. The Court additionally schedules a status conference on that same date at 3:00 p.m. with counsel for Defendants Groves and South, at which time counsel shall advise the Court whether plea agreements have been reached. If there have been no agreements, the Court will schedule a jury trial at that time. The time between the date of this Order and November 5, 2013 shall be excluded from the speedy trial calculation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott
United States District Court