Opinion
Case No. 04-60216-CR-CORN-SNOW.
April 25, 2005
CORRECTED ORDER GRANTING ORE TENUS MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court for Status Conference on April 1, 2005 and the Government's Ore Tenus Motion for Continuance. The Court has considered the motion, and for the reasons as set forth by counsel, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial. Therefore, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Motion for Continuance is GRANTED. Trial in this cause is set for the two-week period commencing August 29, 2005 at 9:00 a.m., before the Honorable James I. Cohn, United States District Judge, 299 East Broward Boulevard, Courtroom 203E, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Calendar Call will be held on August 25, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. ALL COUNSEL AND DEFENDANTS MUST BE PRESENT. At the request of the parties, the Court will entertain a change of plea hearing at the calendar call.
PLEASE NOTE: Qualification for Acceptance of Responsibility is jeopardized if an intention to enter a plea of guilty is not announced at or before the calendar call. see United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual, § 3E1.1 application notes 1(h) and 6 ("[to] qualify under subsection (b)(2) the defendant must have notified authorities of his intention to enter a plea of guilty at a sufficiently early point in the process so that the government may avoid preparing for trial and the court may schedule its calendar efficiently.").
The judge who enters the first written order scheduling a case for trial on a date set, has priority over the services of the attorney so scheduled for the date set. Local Rule 16.3 A.4.
It shall be the duty of the attorneys herein set to ensure that no other judge schedules them for a trial that impacts upon or conflicts with the date set forth above. If any counsel receives a written notice of a trial from another judge, in either state or federal court, that in any way conflicts with this trial schedule setting, it is the obligation of that attorney to notify that judge immediately so that the judge may reschedule his or her calendar, thus leaving counsel conflict scheduling free for this case.
The Court finds that the period of delay from April 1, 2005 and any other trial date set hereafter excludable in calculating the period within which trial must commence in accordance with the provisions of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3161.
DONE AND ORDERED.