3:17-cr-00026•USA v. AYALA et al
Gesamter Gesetzestext
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JERMAINE AYALA, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) Criminal No. 2017-26 ) ) ) ) ) ATTORNEYS: Ronald Sharpe, United States Attorney Sigrid Tejo-Sprotte, AUSA United States Attorney’s Office St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. For the United States of America, Juan F. Matos de Juan Hato Rey, PR For Jermaine Ayala. ORDER GÓMEZ, J. Before the Court is the application of Jermaine Ayala (“Ayala”) to waive his speedy trial. For the reasons stated herein, the time to try this case is extended up to and including August 14, 2017. While the Speedy Trial Act requires that a defendant be tried within seventy days of indictment, the Court specifically finds that extending this period would be in the best interest of justice for several reasons. First, an extension of time is necessary to provide Ayala with additional time to explore plea Case: 3:17-cr-00026-RAM-GAT Document #: 84 Filed: 06/09/17 Page 1 of 3
United States v. Ayala
Criminal No. 2017-26
Order
Page 2
negotiations. Second, the defendant made this request with the
advice and consent of counsel. Finally, Ayala’s counsel has
prior commitments which create a scheduling conflict with the
date of the trial.
Consistent with these concerns, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit has recognized that "whether or
not a case is 'unusual' or 'complex,' an ends of justice
continuance may in appropriate circumstances be granted."
United States v. Fields, 39 F.3d 439, 444 (3d Cir. 1994)(citing
United States v. Dota, 33 F.3d 1179(9th Cir. 1994)("An ends of
justice continuance may be justified on grounds that one side
needs more time to prepare for trial . . . even though a case is
not complex")); see also United States v. Brooks, 697 F.2d 517,
522 (3d Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1071(1983)(no abuse
of discretion where district court found that multiple count,
multiple defendant "case was complex and required additional
time for adequate preparation."); United States v. Lattany, 982
F.2d 866, 883 (3d Cir. 1992)("district court did not abuse its
discretion [by delaying trial] to give counsel . . . opportunity
to . . . decid[e] upon and prepar[e] an appropriate defense.").
The premises considered; it is hereby
ORDERED that the time beginning from the date of this order
granting an extension through August 14, 2017, shall be excluded
Case: 3:17-cr-00026-RAM-GAT Document #: 84 Filed: 06/09/17 Page 2 of 3United States v. Ayala Criminal No. 2017-26 Order Page 3 in computing the time within which a trial must be initiated pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161. S\ Curtis V. Gómez District Judge Case: 3:17-cr-00026-RAM-GAT Document #: 84 Filed: 06/09/17 Page 3 of 3
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.