Summary
granting continuance when defendant's counsel was scheduled for hip replacement therapy with a six-week recovery time
Summary of this case from U.S. v. SmithOpinion
CASE NO. 2:06-cr-215-MEF (WO).
August 1, 2007
ORDER
On July 25, 2007, the defendant Harry Edward Jones, III filed a Motion to Continue Trial (Doc. #150). While the granting of a continuance is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, United States v. Warren, 772 F.2d 827, 837 (11th Cir. 1985), the court is, of course, limited by the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The Speedy Trial Act provides generally that the trial of a defendant in a criminal case shall commence within 70 days of the latter of the filing date of the indictment or the date the defendant appeared before a judicial officer in such matter. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1). See United States v. Vasser, 916 F.2d 624 (11th Cir. 1990).
The Act excludes from this 70 day period any continuance that the judge grants "on the basis of his findings that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial." 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).
The motion states that defendant's counsel is scheduled for hip replacement surgery on August 13, 2007 in Atlanta, Georgia, and has been advised that the recovery period will be at least six weeks. In responses filed at the direction of the Court, both the co-defendant Santo Coleman and the government have no objection to a continuance. Consequently, the court concludes that a continuance of this case is warranted and that the ends of justice served by continuing this case outweighs the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See United States v. Davenport, 935 F.2d 1223, 1235 (11th Cir. 1991) (reasonable time necessary for effective preparation is a significant factor for granting a continuance under the Speedy Trial Act).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. That the defendant's motion filed on July 25, 2007 is GRANTED;
2. That the trial of this case is continued from the August 6, 2007 trial term to the October 15, 2007 trial term.
3. That the Magistrate Judge conduct a pretrial conference prior to the October 15, 2007 trial term.