From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Garcia

United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia
Sep 27, 2021
7:21-cr-9 (WLS) (M.D. Ga. Sep. 27, 2021)

Opinion

7:21-cr-9 (WLS)

09-27-2021

UNITED STATES, v. RICARDO GARCIA., Defendant.


ORDER

W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.

Before the Court is the Parties' Joint Motion for Continuance, filed September 24, 2021. (Doc. 34.) Defendant's case was previously continued on July 7, 2021 to allow Defendant time to adequately review discovery. (Doc. 31.) The Parties move to continue trial in this case again, which is currently scheduled to begin in November 2021, for following reasons.

First, the Defense needs additional time to review discovery, meet with local law enforcement and review the evidence - contained on multiple electronic devices - in law enforcement custody. Granting a continuance in this case will also allow the Defendant to review the evidence, prepare an effective defense and to be more fully prepared for trial with his appointed counsel. The additional time will also afford Defendant's counsel the opportunity for meaningful investigation of the case and to continue discussing a possible resolution with counsel for the Government. For the reasons below, the Motion (Doc. 34) is GRANTED.

The Speedy Trial Act permits a district court to grant a continuance of trial so long as the court makes findings that the ends of justice served by ordering a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

Section 3161(h)(7)(B) provides several factors the Court must consider when granting a continuance. United States v. Ammar, 842 F.3d 1203, 1206 (11th Cir. 2016). Among those factors are the likelihood that the lack of a continuance will result in a miscarriage of justice and the likelihood that failure to grant a continuance would deprive the defendant continuity of counsel or reasonable time necessary for effective preparation. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B).

The Court finds that the failure to grant a continuance here would likely result in a miscarriage of justice and deprive counsel of reasonable time necessary for effective preparation. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and (iv). Notably, the Defense needs additional time to review discovery and potentially work on a pretrial resolution of this matter. (Id. at 2.)

Accordingly, the Parties' Joint Motion for Continuance (Doc. 34) is GRANTED. The case is CONTINUED to the Valdosta trial term beginning February 7, 2022, unless otherwise ordered by the Court. The Court ORDERS that the time from the date of this Order to the conclusion of the February 2022 Trial Term is EXCLUDED FROM COMPUTATION under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7).

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Garcia

United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia
Sep 27, 2021
7:21-cr-9 (WLS) (M.D. Ga. Sep. 27, 2021)
Case details for

United States v. Garcia

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES, v. RICARDO GARCIA., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia

Date published: Sep 27, 2021

Citations

7:21-cr-9 (WLS) (M.D. Ga. Sep. 27, 2021)