Opinion
7:24-cr-26-WLS-TQL-1
09-25-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. CLEMSON MAURICE GRAHAM, Defendant.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE.
Before the Court is Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial in the Interest of Justice (Doc. 40) (“Motion”). Therein, Defendant requests that trial of the case be continued from the Court's November 2024 Valdosta term of Court to the next available trial term. The continuance is requested to allow discovery to be provided, reviewed and for investigation to take place. Defense Counsel respectfully requests an additional continuance to allow for the completion of this process, which would allow for meaningful plea negotiations to take place. Defense Counsel represents that he has consulted with Government's Counsel who does not oppose the instant Motion. The Defendant further states that the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the United States Attorney's Office in a speedy trial.
To satisfy 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A)-(B), the Court assumes Defense Counsel intended to state that the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial, and the Court so finds based on the statements in the Motion. The Court directs Defense Counsel note the correction for future motions to continue.
Based on the stated reasons, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A)-(B). Therefore, the Unopposed Motion for Continuance (Doc. 40) is GRANTED. The Court hereby ORDERS that the trial in the above-referenced matter be CONTINUED to the Valdosta Division February 2025 trial term, and its conclusion, or as may otherwise be ordered by the Court.
Furthermore, it is ORDERED that the time lost under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, be EXCLUDED pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7) because the Court has continued the trial in this case and finds that the failure to grant a continuance would likely result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i).
SO ORDERED.