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. Taylor

September 19, 2006

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
REJON TAYLOR



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Curtis L. Collier Chief United States District Judge

Chief Judge Curtis L. Collier

ORDER

Defendant Rejon Taylor ("Defendant") has filed a motion for a two-month extension in the final pretrial conference, trial dates, and all pretrial deadlines, to include the deadlines concerning expert testimony, plea bargaining, guilty phase and penalty motions, jury instructions and jury selection suggestions (Court File No. 173). The motion requests the Court grant a two-month extension because the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (the "Sixth Circuit") has not yet approved Defendant's revised budget, submitted to the Court following the government's filing the Death Notice as to Defendant (Court File No. 123). Previously, Defendant filed a motion to continue the deadlines for notice of experts and for requesting any necessary Daubert hearing (Court File No. 170). For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant's request for an extension of the mentioned deadlines (Court File Nos. 170, 173).

The Court understands Defendant's counsel will be unable to hire its experts until the revised budget is approved. However, the Court scheduled the trial and pretrial dates in this case with great care. The Court is, and will remain, extremely reluctant to move the final pretrial conference and trial dates. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendant's request for an extension for all motions relative to the guilt or innocence phase of the trial only for motions which will require consultation with an expert whom counsel has been unable to hire while waiting for the revised budget to be approved. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant's request for an extension of time to disclose the nature and substance of experts' reports and the deadline to determine whether a Daubert hearing will be necessary. The Court is unable to determine, at this point, the required length of the extension. Once the revised budget is approved by the Sixth Circuit, the Court will set new deadlines for motions which require the assistance of experts and new expert disclosure dates.

Given the nature of this case, the Court strongly encourages both parties to file motions as early as possible to afford the Court adequate time to consider pretrial motions and to avoid unnecessary delay of the trial. Since the Court sees no reason to continue the September 25, 2006 motions deadline for motions which do not require the assistance of experts, the Court DENIES Defendant's request to continue this deadline and the deadlines for jury instruction requests (January 5, 2006) and submission of jury selection ideas (November 6, 2006). Further, the Court DENIES Defendant's request to continue the dates of the pretrial conference and trial.

SO ORDERED.

20060919

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...

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.