Opinion
CR21-0079-JCC
12-13-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JEANNE ANG RATHER, Defendant.
ORDER
JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant's motion to continue trial (Dkt. No. 30). Having thoroughly considered the motion and relevant record, the Court GRANTS the motion for the reasons explained below.
On May 12, 2021, Defendant Jeanne Ang Rather was charged by indictment with seven counts of bank fraud and three counts of aggravated identity theft. (Dkt. No. 1.) The Court previously granted the parties' stipulated motion to continue and later Defendant's unopposed motion to continue. (Dkt. No. 15, 21.) Trial is currently set for January 18, 2022 (Dkt. No. 24.)
After the parties seemingly reached a resolution, Ms. Rather signed a plea agreement. (Dkt. No. 25.) However, Defense Counsel indicates that, prior to the entrance of the plea, Ms. Rather informed him that she wished to speak to another attorney and no longer wished to enter a plea. (Dkt. No. 30 at 2.) The change of plea hearing was cancelled, and Defense Counsel declares he has not been able to reach his client since this conversation. (Id.) Defense Counsel thus filed this motion to continue trial to a new date “not earlier than March 15, 2022.” (Dkt. No. 30 at 1). On the same day, he also filed a motion to withdraw as counsel (Dkt. No. 31.) Ms. Rather has retained new counsel, and the Court has reserved ruling on the motion to withdraw until such time as new counsel files for and is approved pro hac vice status. (Dkt. No. 36.)
Having thoroughly considered the motion and the relevant record, the Court FINDS that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of Defendant and the public to a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The reasons for this finding are:
1. Taking into account the exercise of due diligence, the failure to grant a continuance would deny Defense Counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, see 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), and would therefore result in a miscarriage of justice, see 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i).
2. The time between the date of this order and the new trial date is a reasonable period of delay given the breakdown in plea negotiations, Defense Counsel's inability to contact his client, and the pending appointment of new defense counsel.
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion (Dkt. No. 30) and ORDERS:
1. The January 18, 2022 jury trial is CONTINUED until April 11, 2022.
2. The November 30, 2021 pretrial motions deadline is CONTINUED until March 4, 2022.
The period from the date of this order until April 11, 2022 is an excludable time period under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).