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. Starks

June 26, 2007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JAMILLE STARKS, CHAKA SLIGH, AND JASON NELSON DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: C. Clifford Shirley, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

(Phillips / Shirley)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

All pretrial motions in this case have been referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) for disposition or report and recommendation regarding disposition by the District Court as may be appropriate. This matter came before the Court on June 25, 2007, for a Pretrial Conference. Defendant Jamille Starks was present with his attorney, Wayne Stambaugh. Defendant Chaka Sligh was present with her attorney, Boyd Venable. Defendant Jason Nelson and his attorney, Charles Poole, were also present. Assistant United States Attorney David Jennings was present on behalf of the government.

The Court first addressed the government's Motion for Brief Extension of Time Within Which to Provide Discovery and to Designate Lead Counsel to Whom Discovery is Provided [Doc. 24]. AUSA Jennings announced that all discovery has been provided to the three defendants, with the exception of one forensic laboratory report. AUSA Jennings described his efforts to obtain the report and expressed his expectation that it would be available within a matter of days. For these reasons, AUSA Jennings told the Court that his motion is now moot; the defendants agreed with this characterization. The government's Motion for Brief Extension of Time Within Which to Provide Discovery and to Designate Lead Counsel to Whom Discovery is Provided [Doc. 24] is DENIED as moot.

Attorney Charles Poole asked the Court for leave to withdraw all motions filed on behalf of Defendant Nelson, to include his Motion for Extension of Motion Deadline [Doc. 32]; and Motion to Continue [Doc. 35]. The Court granted this oral motion to withdraw. Accordingly, Motion for Extension of Motion Deadline [Doc. 32]; and Motion to Continue [Doc. 35] are DENIED as moot.

Attorney Boyd Venable asked the Court for leave to withdraw all motions filed on behalf of Defendant Sligh, to include her Motion for Extension of Motion Deadline [Doc. 33]; and Motion for Subpoena [Doc. 36] and also withdrew her Response to Motion to Continue [Doc. 38]. The Court granted this oral motion to withdraw. Accordingly, [Doc. 33], [Doc. 36] and [Doc. 38] are DENIED as moot.

On behalf of Defendant Starks, Attorney Wayne Stambaugh then made an oral motion to continue the trial date set in this matter for July 10, 2007. Attorney Stambaugh told the Court that he had intended to join the now-withdrawn Motion to Continue filed by Defendant Sligh. Attorney Stambaugh told the Court that he continues to investigate and research an issue of fundamental importance to Mr. Starks' defense, but could not say for certain whether this may necessitate a new trial date. Defendant Starks' motion to continue the trial date is hereby scheduled for hearing on July 9, 2007, at 1:00 p.m. before this Court.

The Court's ruling on these matters is as follows:

1. Motion for Brief Extension of Time Within Which to Provide Discovery and to Designate Lead Counsel to Whom Discovery is Provided [Doc. 24] is DENIED as moot;

2. Motion for Extension of Motion Deadline [Doc. 32] is DENIED as moot;

3. Motion to Continue [Doc. 35] is DENIED as moot;

4. Motion for Extension of Motion Deadline [Doc. 33] is DENIED as moot;

5. Motion for Subpoena [Doc. 36] is DENIED as moot;

6. Response to Motion to Continue [Doc. 38] is ...


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.