Opinion
7:23-CR-47 (WLS-TQL)
05-29-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. JUSTIN JACOBY JACKSON and JULIE CANFIELD, Defendants.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
On May 17, 2024, the Court entered an Order (Doc. 55) for the Parties to review the case, confer, and inform the Court about whether the case is ready to proceed to trial. On May 24, 2024, Defendant Justin Jacoby Jackson (“Defendant Jackson”) notified the Court that he intends to change his plea to one of guilty and asks the Court to notice a pretrial conference. (Doc. 56). However, Defendant Julie Canfield (“Defendant Canfield”) responded by moving the Court, in a filing labeled as a “Response,” to continue the trial in the above-captioned case to a future term. (Doc. 57). Defendant Canfield does not indicate in her Response whether the Government consents to a continuance, and neither Defendant Jackson nor Defendant Canfield have filed a motion to sever.
As the Clerk noted on the docket, it is critical that motions and responses be filed as separate documents so that they appear on the pending motions report and can be properly linked to related filings on the CM/ECF system.
Counsel are ORDERED to file a Response, no later than Friday, May 31, 2024 indicating whether the Court should notice the case for a pretrial conference, and to file the appropriate separately labeled motion if necessary. Any motion to continue should indicate whether the adverse party opposes such a continuance.
SO ORDERED.