1:25-cr-00170•USA v. GROSS et al
Full text
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK ) AUSTIN GROSS, ) -01 JASON LEWIS, ) -02 ISAIAH WRIGHT, ) -03 MAKAYLA HOCHSTETLER, ) -04 JOSE SANCHEZ, ) -05 RONTE MAJORS, ) -06 JACOB BOBBITT, ) -07 PHYLYDIA JACKSON, ) -08 NATHAN DONLAN, ) -09 JULIETTE GALLARDO ZAMORA, ) -10 GAGE BUTLER, ) -11 ALISHA SECREST, ) -12 ) Defendants. ) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT GROSS'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE This matter is before the Court on Defendant Austin Gross' Partially Opposed Motion to Continue Jury Trial (Filing No. 439). The Government does not object to a continuance. Defendants Jacob Bobbit, Nathan Donlan and Jose Sanchez do not object. Defendants Jason Lewis and Juliette Zamora object. The position of remaining co-defendants is unknown. For the reasons explained below, the Motion is granted and the delay attributable to the continuance is excludable from the computations of time pursuant to provisions of the Speedy Trial Act. I. DISCUSSION This matter is scheduled for final pretrial conference on September 22, 2026, and trial by jury on October 19, 2026. Defendant Gross, along with eleven co-defendants, are charged in an Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: <pageID>
2 eleven-count Third Superseding Indictment (Filing No. 364). Gross is charged in ten counts; he is charged with nine co-defendants in Count One (Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute and to Distribute Controlled Substances); he is charged with three co-defendants in Count Seven (Conspiracy to Launder Monetary Instruments); and he is charged with one co-defendant in Counts Eight and Nine (Use of a Communication Facility to Facilitate Drug Trafficking). Jason Lewis is the sole defendant charged in Count Eleven (Use, Carry and Discharge of a Firearm in furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime. Gross is the sole defendant in the remaining five counts, all of which are death-penalty-eligible: Count Two (Continuing Criminal Enterprise), Count Three (Tampering with a Witness), and Counts Four, Five, and Six (Causing Death by Using a Firearm During and in Relation to a Crime of Violence). On April 21, 2026 the Government field a Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty against Gross. (Dkt. 404 ). On May 5, 2026, Gross filed the instant Partially Opposed Motion to Continue Jury Trial, stating "[g]iven the recently filed Notice of Intent to Seek Death Penalty, Mr. Gross seeks an initial 12-month continuance to October 2027". (Dkt. 439). The Government does not object to a continuance. Id. at 3. Defendants Jacob Bobbit, Nathan Donlan and Jose Sanchez do not object. Id. at 2. The position of Defendants Isaiah Wright, Gage Butler, Makayla Hochstetler, Phylydia Jackson, Alisha Seacrest and Ronte Majors is unknown. Defendants Jason Lewis and Juliette Zamora object, "due to the length of time requested." Id. The Seventh Circuit has stated that in deciding whether to grant a motion to continue, a district court should consider several factors, including: (1) the amount of time available for preparation; (2) the likelihood of prejudice from denial of the continuance; (3) the defendant’s role in shortening the effective preparation time; (4) the degree of complexity of the case; (5) the availability of discovery from the prosecution; (6) the likelihood that a continuance will satisfy the Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: <pageID>
3
movant’s needs; and (7) the inconvenience and burden to the district court and its pending case
load. U.S. v. Volpentesta, 727 F.3rd 666, 679 (7th Cir. 2013).
The Court has considered the factors recognized by the Seventh Circuit. This case has been
pending for approximately 9 months and there have been no prior continuances of the trial date.
Giving the filing of the death penalty notice, the likelihood of prejudice to Gross from denial of a
continuance is substantial. The Court finds no inconvenience and burden to the district court and
its pending case load by granting the request to continue this trial.
A continuance is likely to satisfy the movants needs. This case was previously certified
complex, and the filing of the death penalty notice significantly increases the complexity of the
case. Federal courts frequently grant a continuance to allow the defense time to prepare after a
notice of intent to pursue the death penalty is filed. See United States v. George, Criminal Action
No. 17-201, 2018 WL 6812497, at *8 (E.D. La. Dec. 27, 2018) (finding that a continuance of a
joint trial where government sought death penalty for some of the defendants did not violate the
non-capital defendant's speedy trial rights and granting continuance over non-capital defendant's
objection); United States v. Reddick, Crim. No. 09-mj-2001, 2010 WL 5253527, at *5 (D. N.J.
Dec. 17, 2010) ("Given the implications for defendant, it is unreasonable to expect adequate
preparation for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the time periods in the Speedy Trial
Act.") (citing United States v. Bernacett Cosme, 127 F. Supp. 2d 271, 273 (D.P.R. 2001) (granting
a continuance "stopping the STA clock" based on the possibility the government would seek the
death penalty); United States v. Storey, 927 F. Supp. 414, 415–16 (D. Kan. 1996) (granting a
continuance where the defendant faced the death penalty because, "[g]iven the nature of the
charges against the defendant and the penalty he faces, the case is too complex to expect adequate
preparation for pretrial proceedings within the time limits established by §3161(c)(1)").
Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:
<pageID>4 With respect to the two objectors— Jason Lewis (2) and Juliette Zamora (10) — Jason Lewis is charged in Counts One and Eleven, and Juliette Zamora is charged in Counts One and Five. On May 5, 2026, Juliette Zamora filed a petition to enter a plea of guilty (Filing No. 438), so her objection is now moot. In addition, several of Gross' other co-defendants have filed petitions to plead guilty: Gage Butler (11), Makayla Hochstetler (4), Phyldia Jackson (8), Alisa Seacrest (12) Ronte Majors (6), Isaiah Wright (3), Nathan Dolan (9), and the Government has extended plea offers and anticipates that most of the remaining co-defendants will not proceed to trial. Concerning Jason Lewis' objection, his general opposition to a continuance is not persuasive—and he does not indicate how he would be prejudiced by the delay. Under the circumstances here, the interest of justice is best served by the delay to allow a final death penalty defense team to be assembled for Gross, and to allow adequate time for investigation and preparation of a quality defense. These interests outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial in this case. Accordingly, the Court finds that a reasonable period of delay in the trial, until October 2027, is both warranted and excludable from the speedy trial clock, and the risk of prejudice arising from such reasonable delay is outweighed by the economics of a single trial in which all facets of the crime, as to all indicted co-defendants, can be explored once and for all. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(6); United States v. Alviar, 573 F.3d 526, 539 (7th Cir. 2009) (quoting Zafiro v. United States, 506 U.S. 534, 537 (1993) (quoting Richardson v. Marsh, 481 U.S. 200, 209-10 (1987)) (internal citations omitted). "An excludable delay of one defendant may be excludable as to all co- defendants, absent severance.” United States v. Rollins, 544 F.3d 820, 829 (7 th Cir. 208). Accordingly, over the objection of Defendant Jason Lewis, the request for continuance of the trial is granted. Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: <pageID>
5 II. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, Defendant Gross' Partially Opposed Motion to Continue Jury Trial (Filing No. 439) is GRANTED. It is therefore Ordered that the October 19, 2026 trial and the September 22, 2026 final pretrial conference are VACATED. This action is RESCHEDULED for a final pretrial conference on September 14, 2027 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 344 and trial by jury on October 4, 2027 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 344, Birch Bayh Federal Building and United States Courthouse, Indianapolis, Indiana. The Defendants shall appear at the final pretrial conference. The delay resulting from the resetting of the trial date is excluded from the period in which the Defendants must be brought to trial under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1) and 3161(h)(6) and (7) because the ends of justice will be served by such action and outweigh the best interests of the public and the Defendants in a speedy trial. It is further, ORDERED that the period of delay from the filing of the motion to continue to the new trial setting be excluded for speedy trial calculations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1). IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 5/19/2026 Distribution: Patrick S Aguirre Law Offices of Patrick S. Aguirre attorney@paguirrelaw.com Jeffrey A. Baldwin VOYLES VAIANA LUKEMEYER BALDWIN & WEBB jbaldwin@voyleslegal.com Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: <pageID>
6 Gwendolyn M. Beitz INDIANA FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEFENDERS gwendolyn_beitz@fd.org Michelle Patricia Brady DOJ-USAO michelle.brady@usdoj.gov Tyler E. Brant DePrez, Johnson, Brant & Eads, P.A. tylerbrant@shelbylaw.com Adam B. Brower BANKS & BROWER LLP adam.brower@banksbrower.com Julie A. Chambers Julie Chambers CJA Panel Attorney julie@chamberslawllc.com Belle T. Choate ATTORNEY AT LAW choatebelle@gmail.com James A. Edgar J. EDGAR LAW OFFICES, PC. jedgarlawyer@gmail.com Terrance Lamont Kinnard Kinnard Rowley Powers Jimenez tkinnard@krpjlaw.com Steven Ian Loew DOJ-Crm steven.loew2@usdoj.gov Scott Aaron Milkey MCNEELYLAW LLP SMilkey@McNeelyLaw.com Carolyn E Powers Kinnard, Rowley, Powers, Jimenez cpowers@krpjlaw.com Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: <pageID>
7 Terry Wayne Tolliver Brattain Minnix Tolliver terry@bmtindy.com Julie L. Treida TREIDA LAW treidalaw@gmail.com Case 1:25-cr-00170-TWP-MKK Document 470 Filed 05/19/26 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: <pageID>
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.