Court filing
Motion to Continue Trial as to Kisha Sutton — United States v. Sutton et al. (Dkt. 265, S.D. W. Va.)
Summary
Defendant Kisha Sutton's Motion to Continue Trial, filed June 23, 2025 as Document 265 in United States v. Kisha Sutton, Case No. 2:24-cr-00192, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, by counsel Connor Robertson. The motion asks to continue trial so the parties can litigate 404(b) issues not previously applicable because of the Government's Second Superseding Indictment. It states that the Government removed the Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud count and all but 1 of the Bank Fraud counts and added a Money Laundering count. It states that counsel believes a continuance of approximately 45 days could accomplish this goal, and that the July 14, 2025 trial date leaves no time for the needed procedures.
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
Filed June 23, 2025 in United States v. Sutton et al.; one of 235 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2025-06-23 |
Cite this document
“Motion to Continue Trial as to Kisha Sutton — United States v. Sutton et al. (Dkt. 265, S.D. W. Va.).”
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, No. 2:24-cr-00192, Doc. 265, filed 2025-06-23. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-kisha-sutton-wvsd-240497/2025-06-23-gov-uscourts-wvsd-240497-265-0-doc-265/
, SHA-256 ea7a2cd7f89929ba7ebcc9cba2b6c720784a29f65276f417b2bdee5536ae04df.Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, V. CASE NO.: 2:24-cr-00192 KISHA SUTTON, DEFENDANT. DEFENDANT KISHA SUTTON’S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL NOW COMES the Defendant, Kisha Sutton, by and through counsel, Connor Robertson,andrespectfullymovestheCourttoContinuethetrialinthismattersothatthe parties can litigate 404(b) issues not previously applicable due to the Government’s Second Superseding Indictment. In support thereof, the Defendant states as follows: 1. On June 6, 2025, the Court granted DefendantShamiseWright’sSecondMotionto Continue Pretrial andTrialDates(ECF 209) by Order(ECF 225) rescheduling the trialofthismattertoJuly14,2025at9:00a.m.TheCourtalsosetaPre-trialMotion Deadline of June 23, 2025. 2. Since the time of that Order, the Government secured a Second Superseding Indictment (ECF 246) which significantly alteredthescopeofthecaseastoKisha Sutton. Most importantly, the Government removed the previously charged Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud count and all but 1 of the actual Bank Fraud counts. They then added a Money Laundering count. Therefore,asitstandsnow, Ms. Sutton faces one count of aiding and abetting Bank Fraud and one count of Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 265 Filed 06/23/25 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1317 aidingandabettingMoneyLaunderingwiththeonlyremainingco-defendantbeing Shamise Wright. 3. TheCountsofConspiracyandBankFraudastoCylenaSuttonandRahmelMeekins weredismissedbyNolleProsequi(ECF243&244)onJune9,2025,onedaybefore theissuanceoftheSecondSupersedingIndictment.Itisbelievedthatalltheother co-defendants have already pleaded guilty. 4. On June 16, 2025, theGovernmentserveditsSecondSupplementalResponseofthe UnitedStatesofAmericatoDefendant’sStandardDiscoveryRequestsandRequestof theUnitedStatesforReciprocalDiscovery(ECF258)onDefendant,whichnowlisted all of the applicable loan documents, IP address documents, IRS documents, Verizon subscriber information documents, etc. from the now removed co-defendantsasbeing404(b)evidencetheGovernmentintendstouseagainstthe Defendant at trial. The documents would have previously been substantive as to the particular bank fraud counts between Ms. Sutton and her co-defendants, but nowthattheyhavebeenremovedfromtheIndictment,itappearstheGovernment will present them as 404(b). 5. DefendantSuttonhassignificantchallengestothis404(b)evidencethatneedtobe litigated. A Motion in Limine is being filed along with this Motion to Continue, to challengethe404(b)evidence.First,theGovernment’s404(b)Noticeisinsufficient to properly advise the Defendant of the proper uses of the 404(b) evidence. Second,becausetheNoticeisinsufficient,Defendantcannotproperlyarticulatethe challenge to the 404(b) disclosure. For example, without knowing the precise purpose,asisrequiredbyFed.R.Evid.404(b)(3),ofparticular404(b)documents, Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 265 Filed 06/23/25 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 1318 the Defendant is incapable of knowing whether the 404(b) purpose is being contestedasanissueinthecase.Inotherwords,thereareportionsofthiscasethe Defendantdoesnotdispute,anditisverylikelythattheproposed404(b)evidence would be objectionable due to its redundancy. But again, without knowing the purpose,theDefendantcannotarticulatearesponse.Finally,theDefendantintends tochallengethe404(b)evidenceasnotbeingrelevanttoanyissueindisputeand that the evidence violates Rule 403 because its probative value is outweighed by substantial prejudice. 6. This404(b)issueneedstobelitigatedandtheDefenserequestsa404(b)pre-trial hearingonthematterinorderto,ataminimum,createaproperrecord,apre-trial ruling by the Court, and time to understand the Court’s ruling prior to trial.1 7. The Defendant’s404(b)Motion,alongwiththisMotion,isbeingfiledaccordingto thePre-TrialMotionsdeadline-June23,2025.TheGovernmentisentitledtofilea ResponseandtheDefendantisentitledtoaReply.Presumablythen,thisCourt,or theMagistrateCourt,willholdapre-trialhearingonthematterandissuearuling, which could then be subject to further objections and a decision by this Court. None of these procedures can be carried out prior to the July 14, 2025 trial date. 8. AsarticulatedintheMotionforReconsiderationofTrialDates(ECF237),undersign counsel is unavailable from June 27, 2025 through July 13, 2025 and cannot meaningfully participate prior to trial. 9. ThisMotionisnotbeingfiledoutofbadfaith,norisitanattempttofrivolouslybuy moretime.Itisjusttheopposite.Undersignedcounselwasreadyfortrialpriorto 1Counsel is also filing a new Venue challenge which needs to be separately litigated. Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 265 Filed 06/23/25 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 1319 thelastcontinuance.ItwastheGovernmentwhosignificantlychangedthescopeof the case and its strategy since the lastcontinuance.Itwouldbepatentlyunfairto not allow the Defense the proper procedure and time to mount an effective defense. 10.404(b) issues are commonlydecidedbypre-trialhearingswheretheDefensecan challenge the issues and the Court can make a ruling. This allows for judicial efficiencyduringtrialandtheDefensetoproperlypreservetherecord. Thisisone ofthosetimeswhereapre-trialhearingisnecessary,becausetheDefensehasnot been properly advised of alleged 404(b) evidence. 11.Due to undersigned counsel’s unavailability until July 13, 2025, the Defense is asking for a briefing schedule that allows counseltimetoreturntowork,fileany reply the the Government’s Response to the 404(b) and a hearing to be held by either the Magistrate or this Court, with time for objections to be filed it the proceedings are performed by the Magistrate. 12.Undersigned counsel believes a continuance ofthetrialofapproximately45days could accomplish this goal. 13.The Government, nor the co-defendant, Shamise Wright, are prejudiced by this request.However,DefendantSuttonwillbesignificantlyprejudicedanddeniedDue Process, should she not have the opportunity to mount a defense against the Government’s last minute change in position and newly disclosed evidence. Ms. Sutton would also be denied the opportunity to properly develop the record. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests this Court continue the trial in thismatter,issueabriefingandpre-trialhearingschedulethataccommodatespreviously Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 265 Filed 06/23/25 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 1320 paidforandnon-refundableschedule,contactallcounselpriortosettingdatestoensure availabilitysothatfurtherMotionsdonotneedtobefiled,andforothersuchreliefasis necessary and proper. Respectfully submitted, By Counsel S://Connor D. Robertson________ Connor Robertson (11460) ROBERTSON LAW PLLC 2939 Virginia Avenue, Suite 2010 Hurricane, WV 25526 (304) 557-1601 cdr@croblaw.com Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 265 Filed 06/23/25 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 1321 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, V. CASE NO.: 2:24-CR-000192-01 KISHA SUTTON, DEFENDANT. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Connor Robertson, certify that on the 23rd day of June, 2025, a copy of the foregoing motion was served on theUnitedStatesbyECF,toJonathanStorage,Assistant United States Attorney to the following: Jonathan Storage Assistant United States Attorney Jonathan.Storage@usdoj.gov S:// Connor D. Robertson Connor Robertson (11460) ROBERTSON LAW PLLC 2939 Virginia Avenue, Suite 2010 Hurricane, WV 25526 (304) 557-1601 CDR@CROBLAW.COM Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 265 Filed 06/23/25 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 1322
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.wvsd.240497.265.0.pdf
- Size
- 124,532 bytes
- SHA-256
- ea7a2cd7f89929ba7ebcc9cba2b6c720784a29f65276f417b2bdee5536ae04df
- Original
- PACER (login required)