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. Caldera

February 8, 2006

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ROGASIANO CALDERA, A/K/A CHANO CALDERA; WILLIAM E. MENDEZ; CLAUDIA M. MENDEZ; AND BENEDICTA GOMEZ, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Wiley Y. Daniel

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court in connection with two motions: (1) Defendant Claudia M. Mendez's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time Within Which to File Evidentiary Challenges, and (2) Defendant Benedicta Gomez's Motion for Setting a Date Certain for Filing of Pretrial Motions. The motions seek an extension of time to file motions and/or evidentiary challenges, and request that the speedy trial deadlines be tolled.

More specifically, Claudia Mendez's motion seeks an extension of time to February 28, 2006, to file evidentiary challenges to the evidence, asserting that the parties need additional time to consider a plea agreement tendered by the Government and due to the complexity of the action. The motion filed by Benedicta Gomez requests an extension of time to March 31, 2006, asserting that this time is required for the effective representation of Ms. Gomez, including the investigation, preparation and filing of pretrial motions. The motion indicates that additional time is also needed because settlement negotiations are ongoing and this case is complex in that it involves voluminous discovery, multiple defendants, and complex financial transactions.

Having reviewed the motion and responses and being fully advised in the premises, I grant the motions and give Defendants an extension of time to Friday, March 31, 2006, to file motions. I first note that by Order dated November 10, 2005, I granted an ends of justice continuance pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(iv) and tolled the speedy trial deadlines to January 31, 2006. I now find that another continuance of the speedy trial deadlines is warranted.

Specifically, while the parties assert that this case is complex, I do not find an adequate showing at this time of complexity. I do, however, find that another sixty (60) day continuance of the speedy trial deadlines is warranted pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(iv) so that the parties will have the time needed to pursue settlement negotiations and/or conduct an investigation and prepare motions, if applicable. I further find for the above reasons that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny Defendants and their counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective trial preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Finally, I find that the ends of justice served by an additional sixty (60) day extension of the speedy trial deadlines outweigh the best interest of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(iv).

In conclusion, it is

ORDERED that Defendant Claudia M. Mendez's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time Within Which to File Evidentiary Challenges is GRANTED. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Benedicta Gomez's Motion for Setting a Date Certain for Filing of Pretrial Motions is GRANTED. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants are given an extension of time to file motions up to and including Friday, March 31, 2006. The Government shall file its responses to motions by Wednesday, April 12, 2006. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the speedy trial deadlines are extended for an additional sixty (60) days, from January 31, 2006, to Friday, March 31, 2006 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(iv). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that by Friday, March 31, 2006, if any Defendant has not filed a notice of disposition, the parties shall contact my chambers to set a status conference and/or hearing on pending motions.

Wiley Y. Daniel U. S. District Judge

20060208

© 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.