Opinion
1:24-CR-40 (WLS-TQL)
12-23-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. BOBBY DEMERIUS STEVENS, Defendant.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Before the Court is Defendant Bobby Demerius Stevens's (Defendant”) Unopposed Motion to Continue (Doc. 24) (“the Motion”). Therein, Defendant asks the Court to continue the trial in the case from the specially set January 2025 trial term to the next trial term of the Court. Counsel contends such a continuance is warranted to allow him to review discovery and prepare pretrial motions.
For the stated reasons, and because the Government does not oppose, 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. 24) is GRANTED. The trial in the above-captioned matter is hereby CONTINUED to the April 2025 trial 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).
Although Defendant does not specify, the Court construes the Motion to Continue as requesting that the trial be continued until the conclusion of the next trial term. It is the Court's practice to grant continuances until the conclusion of a particular trial term to allow the scheduling of multiple trials during that term. If Defendant objects to this construction, he shall immediately advise the Court of such an objection by writing.
SO ORDERED.