United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Asheville Division
Carleton Metcalf, United States Magistrate Judge.
matter came before the Court and was heard on February 25,
2019 on the “Motion for Waiver of Speedy Trial and the
Right to Have Charges Presented to Grand Jury Within 30 Days
from Arrest on Criminal Complaint/Warrant”
(“Motion for Waiver”) (Doc. 11). At the
conclusion of the hearing, the Court took the Motion for
Waiver under advisement. This Order now follows.
criminal complaint (Doc. 1) was filed against Defendant on
January 16, 2019. Defendant was arrested the same day.
appeared before the Court on January 18, 2019 for his initial
preliminary hearing was conducted on January 23, 2019,
following which the Court determined that probable cause
existed. Fed. Rule. Crim. Proc. 5.1. Defendant waived his
right to a detention hearing at that time.
January 25, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion for Detention
Hearing and Release on Bond to an Inpatient Treatment Program
(Doc. 8). The Motion was denied following a hearing on
January 28, 2019.
February 21, 2019, the Motion for Waiver was filed. The
Motion for Waiver requests that Defendant be permitted to
“waive his rights to a speedy trial and the right to
have said charges presented to a Grand Jury within 30 days
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161”. (Doc. 11). The
Motion for Waiver states that this deadline is on or about
February 21, 2019 (the same day the Motion for Waiver was
filed). The Motion for Waiver also indicates that the
Government intends to present the matter to a Grand Jury
during the week of March 18, 2019 or, at the latest, during
the week of April 1, 2019.
the Motion for Waiver asks the Court to endorse a waiver of
Defendant's rights under the Speedy Trial Act,
the public also has an interest in a speedy
trial.Further, while the preamble to the Motion
for Waiver indicates it is being filed by Defendant, the
document has been executed by counsel for the Government,
counsel for Defendant, and Defendant himself. Therefore, the
Court considers the Motion for Waiver to be a joint motion
seeking an extension of the deadline by which a bill of
information or indictment must be filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
motion may be allowed where the Court finds “that the
ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the
best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy
trial” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
See United States v. Mathurin, 690 F.3d 1236,
1241-42 (11th Cir. 2012) (“It is clear Congress
specifically contemplated the possibility that one or both
parties, for reasons not listed in the Act, might need more
than thirty days before an information or indictment could be
filed. For those cases, it established a specific procedure
by which a court would have to approve the delay based on
on-the-record ‘findings that the ends of justice served
by taking such [a delay] outweigh the best interest of the
public and the defendant in a speedy trial.'”).
regard to the basis for the Motion for Waiver, the parties
state that the investigation of the “incident serving
as the basis for the criminal charges in this case is
continuous and ongoing”. (Doc. 11). Further, at the
hearing, the Government cited Defendant's cooperation in
the investigation as a reason for an extension of the
deadline to file an information or indictment. Counsel for
Defendant stated that the extension was in Defendant's
consideration of the Motion for Waiver, the statements of
counsel during the hearing, and a review of applicable
authorities, including specific consideration of the
provisions and factors appearing in 18 U.S.C. §
3161(h)(7), the Court finds and concludes that the ends of
justice served by extending the deadline for the Government
to file a bill of information or indictment outweigh the best
interests of the public and Defendant in a speedy trial, and
further that the time between the filing of the Motion for
Waiver (February 21, 2019) and the extended deadline for the
filing of a bill of information or indictment allowed by this
Order (April 5, 2019) should be excluded from Speedy Trial
Act computations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
Accordingly, the Motion for Waiver (Doc. 11) will be allowed.
See United States v. Anglin, 470 Fed.Appx. 511, 513
(7th Cir. 2012).
IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
Motion for Wavier (Doc. 11) is GRANTED; and,
2. The deadline for the Government to file a bill of
information or indictment in this ...