Opinion
7:23-CR-68 (WLS-TQL-1)
10-03-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. DONALD PATRICK PARR, Defendant.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Before the Court is Defendant Donald Patrick Parr's (“Defendant”) Unopposed Motion for Continuance in the Interests of Justice (“the Motion”) (Doc. 27). Therein, Defendant asks the Court to grant a continuance of his trial from the October 2024 trial term in the Valdosta Division, to the next Valdosta Division trial term. Defendant contends this continuance is warranted to allow additional time for discovery, investigation, research, and consultation. Despite the fact that Counsel only asks the Court to continue the pretrial conference, the Court construes the Motion as one to continue both the trial and the pretrial conference in the interests of justice. If Defendant disagrees with the Court's interpretation and conclusion, he shall immediately file a written stating the same and the reasons why.
Based on the Defendant's stated reasons and the fact that the Government does not oppose the Motion, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and Defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A)-(B). Thus, and for good cause shown, the Motion (Doc. 27) is GRANTED.
The trial in the above-captioned matter is hereby CONTINUED to the Valdosta Division February 2025 term and its conclusion, or as may be otherwise 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.