Opinion
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 2:15cr332-MHT (WO)
01-22-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MARIO ALBERTO MENDEZ-BALLEZA
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the court on defendant Mario Alberto Mendez-Balleza's motion to continue. For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that jury selection and trial, now set for February 8, 2016, should be continued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
While the granting of a continuance is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, United States v. Stitzer, 785 F.2d 1506, 1516 (11th Cir. 1986), the court is limited by the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The Act provides in part:
"In any case in which a plea of not guilty is entered, the trial of a defendant charged in an information or indictment with the commission of an offense shall commence within seventy days from the filing date (and making
public) of the information or indictment, or from the date the defendant has appeared before a judicial officer of the court in which such charge is pending, whichever date last occurs."§ 3161(c)(1). The Act excludes from the 70-day period any continuance based on "findings that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial." § 3161(h)(7)(A). In granting such a continuance, the court may consider, among other factors, whether the failure to grant the continuance "would deny counsel for the defendant ... reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence." § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
The court concludes that, in this case, the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the interest of the public and Mendez-Balleza in a speedy trial. Mendez-Balleza's counsel has informed the court that she needs more time to obtain records regarding Mendez-Balleza's recent apprehension in Laredo, Texas, and to consult with her client, in light of the fact that he was returned to this jurisdiction less than two weeks ago. Especially given that the government does not oppose his motion, the court finds that a continuance is warranted in order to allow the defense to obtain and consider these records and to prepare for trial or engage in plea negotiations.
***
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1) Defendant Mario Alberto Mendez-Balleza's unopposed motion to continue trial (doc. no. 31) is granted.
(2) The jury selection and trial, now set for February 8, 2016, are reset for April 18, 2016, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 2FMJ of the Frank M. Johnson Jr. United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama.
DONE, this the 22nd day of January, 2016.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE