Opinion
2:21-cr-00236-JAD-EJY-1
10-26-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. HENRIETTA BINFORD, Defendant.
JASON M. FRIERSON United States Attorney STEVEN W. MYHRE Assistant United States Attorney CHRISTOPHER BURTON Chief, Special Prosecutions Section Counsel for Plaintiff ANGELA H. DOWS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10339 CORY READE DOWS & SHAFER Attorney for Defendant Henrietta Binford
JASON M. FRIERSON
United States Attorney
STEVEN W. MYHRE
Assistant United States Attorney
CHRISTOPHER BURTON
Chief, Special Prosecutions Section Counsel for Plaintiff
ANGELA H. DOWS, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10339
CORY READE DOWS & SHAFERAttorney for Defendant Henrietta Binford
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MOTIONS DEADLINE ONLY (FIFTH REQUEST)
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Jason M. Frierson, United States Attorney, as well as Christopher Burton and Steven W. Myhre, Assistant United States Attorneys, Counsel for the United States of America; and Angela H. Dows, Esq., counsel for Defendant HENRIETTA BINFORD, that the pretrial motions and notices of defense deadline be moved for approximately sixty (60) days, to on or before December 19, 2022. The instant stipulation is not intended to request a continuance of the current calendar call and trial dates of January 30, 2023, and February 7, 2023, respectively.
This is the fifth overall request for a continuance in this case, and the fourth request by instant counsel for Defendant HENRIETTA BINFORD. This Stipulation is entered into based upon the following:
1. That the parties request a continuance of the motions and notices of defense deadline, which is currently set to expire on October 18, 2022.
2. The requested extension of the pretrial motions and notice of defense deadline from October 18, 2022 to December 19, 2022 is, in part, to allow for one or more persons hired by Defendant to review the discovery and/or witnesses in the case. One particular investigator hired by Defendant was approved in September of 2022, thus requiring additional time to conduct work in the case, without revealing the nature or extent of the same.
3. That counsel for Defendant has conferred with her client, who does not object to the requested continuance.
4. That the additional time requested herein is not sought for purposes of delay, but merely to allow the parties sufficient time by which to investigate, research, respond and litigate any pretrial motions and/or defenses deemed necessary prior to trial.
5. The additional time requested by this stipulation does not request an extension of the time of trial. To the extent required, the additional time period requested to continue the matter serves the ends of justice and outweighs the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (h)(7)(B).
6. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and (ii) denial of this request for continuance would result in a miscarriage of justice, as additional time is needed by which to effectively and thoroughly research and prepare for trial within the time limits established by 18 U.S.C. §3161, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
7. For all the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the pretrial motions and notices of defense deadline.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER THEREON
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the pending Stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court finds that:
1. Defense counsel requires a continuance of the motions and notices of defense deadline in order to review and research the case, including the review by one or more persons including hired investigator(s) in the case.
2. The parties also request additional time to effectively represent their clients in appropriately preparing the case for trial, however do not request an extension of the calendar call or trial dates at this time.
3. Defendant does not object to the continuance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The additional time requested by this stipulation does not extend the time of trial.
The period was previously found excludable in computing the time within which the trial herein must commence pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (h)(7)(B).
2. Denial of this request for continuance would result in a miscarriage of justice, as additional time is needed by which to review the case, in a case involving charges of Healthcare Fraud and Aiding and Abetting, Aggravated Identity Theft and Aiding and Abetting, and False Statements Relating to Health Care Matters and Aiding and Abetting pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1347; 18 U.S.C. § 1028A; 18 U.S.C. § 1035(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
3. Denial of this request for continuance would also deny the parties herein sufficient time and the opportunity within which to effectively and thoroughly research and prepare for trial within the time limits established by 18 U.S.C. §3161, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. For the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the motions and notices of defense deadline, and such continuance outweighs the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the parties shall have to and including December 19, 2022 within which to file any and all pretrial motions and notices of defense.
IT IS SO ORDERED.