Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Brooks

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

May 15, 2019

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Lennie Dwayne Brooks (1), and Randy Lorenzo Brooks (2), Defendants.

          ORDER

          Tony N. Leung United States Magistrate Judge

         This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Lennie Dwayne Brooks and Randy Lorenzo Brooks's Motion to Continue Filing and Hearing Dates (ECF No. 131).[1]Defendant Randy Lorenzo Brooks has filed a Statement of Facts in Support of Exclusion of Time Under Speedy Trial Act (ECF No. 138).

         Defendants request that the criminal motions filing deadline and motions hearing be continued by 30 days based on voluminous additional discovery provided by the Government following the superseding indictment. Defendant Randy Lorenzo Brooks additionally states that he is “considering a potential settlement with the Government.” (ECF No. 138 at ¶ 5.) The Government does not object to the requested continuance. (ECF Nos. 131, 138 at ¶ 6.)

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h), this Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial and such continuance is necessary to provide Defendants and their attorneys reasonable time necessary for effective preparation and to make efficient use of the parties' resources. Based on all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. The Motion to Continue Filing and Hearing Dates (ECF No. 131) is GRANTED.

         2. The period of time from April 24 through June 19, 2019, shall be excluded from Speedy Trial Act computations in this case. See United States v. Mallett, 751 F.3d 907, 911 (8th Cir. 2014) (“Exclusions of time attributable to one defendant apply to all codefendants.” (quotation omitted)); United States v. Arrellano-Garcia, 471 F.3d 897, 900 (8th Cir. 2006) (same).

         3. All motions in the above-entitled case shall be filed and served consistent with Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12(b) and 47 on or before May 29, 2019. D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(1). Two courtesy copies of all motions and responses shall be delivered directly to the chambers of Magistrate Judge Leung.[2]

         4. Counsel shall electronically file a letter on or before May 29, 2019, indicating whether the presently filed motions shall apply to any superseding indictment.

         5. Counsel shall electronically file a letter on or before May 29, 2019, if no motions will be filed and there is no need for hearing.

         6. All responses to motions shall be filed by June 13, 2019. D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(2).

         7. Any Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses shall be filed by June 13, 2019. D. Minn. LR. 12.1(c)(3)(A).

         8. Any Responsive Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses shall be filed by June 17, 2019. D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(3)(B).

         9. A motions hearing will be held pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12(c) where:

a. The government makes timely disclosures and Defendant pleads particularized matters for which an evidentiary ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.