Opinion
7:22-CR-14 (WLS)
09-27-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. EUBIA UNDRAE WALKER, II, Defendant.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Before the Court is the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial in the Interest of Justice (Doc. 61) (“Motion”). Therein, Defense Counsel requests a continuance of the trial of this matter from the November 2023 Valdosta trial term to the next trial term.Defense Counsel states that if the Court denies the pending motion to suppress, then Defendant and Defense Counsel will need time to prepare for trial in this case. Defense Counsel has two trials scheduled, one beginning October 16, 2023, which is expected to last two weeks, and the second scheduled to be in the Valdosta Division of this Court for the trial of United States v. Laronce Howell and Dewayne Howell, 7:22-cr-00055-WLS-TQL, beginning the second week of November. Defense Counsel states the preparation for those two trials will significantly limit the time for him to effectively analyze, discuss and prepare a defense for Defendant so a continuance is needed in the interest of justice. Defense Counsel represents that the Government does not oppose the requested continuance. Defense Counsel further states that Defendant consents to an extension of the deadline for filing motions, including but not limited to any motion to suppress evidence, in the event that plea negotiations are unsuccessful. Defendant submits that failure to grant a continuance would deny him the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation and resolution of legal issues, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
Defense Counsel also states that Defendant requests the Court “continue this case until [sic] for one additional trial calendar.” (Doc. 61 ¶ 5.) The Court presumes that as Defense Counsel regularly practices before this Court, that he is aware that the Court's next Valdosta trial term is February 2024. Accordingly, the case will be continued to the next regularly available Valdosta trial term. If Defense Counsel disagrees with the Court's interpretation and findings, he shall immediately inform the Court by appropriate motion.
Based on the Defendant's stated reasons, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting 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 Motion (Doc. 61) is GRANTED.
The Court hereby ORDERS that the trial in the above-referenced matter be CONTINUED to the Valdosta Division February 2024 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 (a) would likely result in a miscarriage of justice, and (b) would deny Defense Counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), (iv).
SO ORDERED.