Joint Motion to Continue Trial Date — United States v. Starling (Dkt. 30, D. Or.)

Summary

A joint motion to continue the trial date, filed August 17, 2026 as Document 30 in United States v. Starling, No. 3:26-cr-00205-AN, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The United States and defendants David Starling and Benjamin Young ask the court under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) to continue the trial for six months. The motion states that the indictment was returned on June 10, 2026, that Count One alleges a conspiracy to defraud the government of Covid-related program benefits involving two federal agencies, and that Volume 1 of discovery consists of 6,785 documents and 59,553 pages. It is signed by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Christopher Cardani and Meredith Bateman and by defense counsel Jeremy Delicino and Samuel Kauffman.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Case 3:26-cr-00205-AN          Document 30         Filed 08/17/26      Page 1 of 4




SCOTT E. BRADFORD, OSB #062824
United States Attorney
District of Oregon
CHRISTOPHER CARDANI, MASB #550609
Christopher.Cardani@usdoj.gov
MEREDITH BATEMAN, OSB # 192273
Meredith.Bateman@usdoj.gov
Assistant United States Attorneys
1000 SW Third Ave., Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204-2902
Telephone: (503) 727-1000
Attorneys for United States of America


                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                                   DISTRICT OF OREGON

                                    PORTLAND DIVISION


 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                          3:26-cr-00205-AN

                v.                                 JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL
                                                   DATE
 DAVID STARLING, and
 BENJAMIN YOUNG,

                Defendants.

       The United States of America, and defendants David Starling and Benjamin Young,

jointly move this Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) to continue the trial date for a

period of six months. Support for this request follows.

       Background

       The indictment charging both defendants was returned on June 10, 2026. (ECF 1). Both

defendants reside in Utah. Defendant Young made his initial appearance via summons and was

arraigned on June 30, 2026. (ECF 14). His trial was set for September 1, 2026. At the time,

Joint Motion to Continue Trial Date                                                         Page 1

       Case 3:26-cr-00205-AN           Document 30        Filed 08/17/26       Page 2 of 4




defendant Young was represented by the Federal Defender’s Office. Since the arraignment,

there was a change of counsel, and Samuel Kauffman now represents defendant Young. (ECF

27). Defendant David Starling was arraigned in Oregon on July 20, 2026, and his trial date is

currently set for September 22, 2026. (ECF 25). Both defendants were released on conditions.

This Court scheduled a telephonic status hearing for August 17, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. (ECF 29).

       Count One alleges that defendants conspired to defraud the United States Government by

unlawfully obtaining millions in Covid-related program benefits through a complex scheme

involving two different federal agencies. Volume 1 of discovery has been finalized for

transmission. It consists of 6,785 documents, 59,553 pages, and is 53GB in size. It will be

provided to the defense with an index once thumb drives are provided to the USAO by counsel.

The discovery is substantively complex and includes numerous spreadsheets, tax and social

security forms involving multiple individuals, applications for program benefits, and witness

statements. There will be additional discovery, primarily consisting of the defendants’ emails

obtained through a search warrant. This additional discovery will be provided once the material

is reviewed for attorney-client privilege.

       The Law

       The Speedy Trial Act, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3161, requires that a trial commence within

70 days of initial appearance or indictment. The statute sets forth various delays that are

justifiably excluded from the 70-day calculation. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(A)–(H). For time to be

excluded, the Court must make certain findings on the record that the ends of justice outweigh

the public and defendants’ interest in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

       Excludability is not automatic and the amount of time excluded must be reasonable.

United States v. Henry, 984 F.3d 1343, 1350 (9th Cir. 2021). Reasonableness is based on the

Joint Motion to Continue Trial Date                                                           Page 2

       Case 3:26-cr-00205-AN           Document 30         Filed 08/17/26       Page 3 of 4




facts of the case. Id. The factors a court must consider include whether the case is “so unusual

or so complex, due to the number of defendants, the nature of the prosecution, or the existence of

novel questions of fact or law, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial

proceedings or for the trial itself within the time limits.” 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii). Courts

look to whether the delay was necessary to achieve its purpose and to whether there will be any

actual prejudice by the delay. Henry, 984 F.3d at 1350.

       The parties may offer a stipulation containing detailed and verified factual findings

specifically describing why the case should be considered complex. Id. at 1353. To justify a

continuance, the Court must make findings on the record detailing why the case is complex, and

it may base those findings on the parties’ stipulated facts. Id. The record must show the court

considered the “ends of justice” factors and did not simply approve a request for a continuance

without making an inquiry into the need for the continuance. United States v. Ramirez-Cortez,

213 F.3d 1149, 1154 (9th Cir. 2000). The length of the exclusion should be “limited in time.”

Id.

       The facts at issue, and the law governing the entitlement of government benefits, are both

complex. Preparing an effective defense will require a thorough review of the voluminous

discovery, the relevant law and regulations, and a defense investigation. These are factors

recognized as appropriate exclusions under the statute. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii), (iv).

       Based on the individual facts of this case, the complexity of the facts and law, and the

need to prepare an effective defense, the parties jointly recommend that the Court grant a six-

month continuance, to March 2027. 1


1
  Absent a severance the trial date should be the same for both defendants, who were indicted
together.

Joint Motion to Continue Trial Date                                                           Page 3

        Case 3:26-cr-00205-AN           Document 30            Filed 08/17/26     Page 4 of 4




        Defense counsel have consulted with their clients. It is the government’s understanding

through email communications with counsel that neither defendant objects to the request to

continue the trial. This will be confirmed by counsel during the status conference scheduled for

Monday, August 17, 2026.

        If, after a review of this motion and the status conference, the Court agrees with this joint

motion, it should make a finding, orally or in writing, that a six-month continuance is in the best

interests of justice and explain the basis for this finding.

Dated: August 17, 2026.                                 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT E. BRADFORD
United States Attorney

/s/ Christopher Cardani                                 /s/ Jeremy Delicino
CHRISTOPHER CARDANI, MASB #550609                       JEREMY DELICINO
Assistant United States Attorney                        Attorney for David Starling

/s/ Meredith Bateman                                    /s/ Samuel Kauffman
MEREDITH BATEMAN, OSB # 192273                          SAMUEL KAUFFMAN
Assistant United States Attorney                        Attorney for Benjamin Young




Joint Motion to Continue Trial Date                                                             Page 4

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.ord.194637.30.0.pdf

Size

301,741 bytes

SHA-256

52dfd225c4ed9392edc120e1946eaa6a74114d227182c157e4c2596ea0adee6d

Our copy

gov.uscourts.ord.194637.30.0.pdf

Original

archive.org