USA v. AYALA et al

DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
WAHILLI JAMES,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
) Criminal No. 2017-26
)
)
)
)
)
ATTORNEYS:
Joycelyn Hewlett, Acting United States Attorney
Anna Alexandrovna Vlasova, AUSA
United States Attorney’s Office
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.
For the United States of America,
Alex Omar Rosa-Ambert
Rosa-Ambert Law Offices
San Juan, PR
For Wahilli James.
ORDER
GÓMEZ, J.
Before the Court is the application of Wahilli James
(“James”) to waive his speedy trial. For the reasons stated
herein, the time to try this case is extended up to and
including October 1, 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
Case: 3:17-cr-00026-RAM-GAT Document #: 136 Filed: 08/03/17 Page 1 of 3

United States v. James
Criminal No. 2017-26
Order
Page 2
necessary to provide James with additional time to explore plea
negotiations. Second, the defendant made this request with the
advice and consent of counsel. Finally, without an extension,
the parties would be denied reasonable time necessary to
adequately prepare for 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
Case: 3:17-cr-00026-RAM-GAT Document #: 136 Filed: 08/03/17 Page 2 of 3

United States v. James
Criminal No. 2017-26
Order
Page 3
ORDERED that the time beginning from the date of this order
granting an extension through October 1, 2017, shall be excluded
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 #: 136 Filed: 08/03/17 Page 3 of 3