Order Granting Joint Motion to Continue Deadlines and New Scheduling Order — United States v. Aleta Necole Thomas, Pepper Jones, and Katrina West

Summary

An order dated September 7, 2021 in United States v. Aleta Necole Thomas, Pepper Jones, and Katrina West, Case No. 21-CR-239-GKF, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, Doc. 45, granting the joint motion of the government and the defendants to continue deadlines and enter a new scheduling order [Doc. 40]. The order recounts the May 20, 2021 indictment and the July 20, 2021 superseding indictment, which charge counts of False Statement to a Financial Institution under 18 U.S.C. § 1014 and, as to Thomas, Aggravated Identity Theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1). Citing voluminous discovery and plea negotiations, the court makes ends-of-justice findings under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). It strikes the September 20, 2021 trial setting, resets the jury trial to December 20, 2021, and excludes that period from Speedy Trial calculations.

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

Full text

Case 4:21-cr-00239-GKF         Document 45 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 09/07/21            Page 1 of 4




                      IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                    FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff,

 v.                                                    Case No. 21-CR-239-GKF

 ALETA NECOLE THOMAS, PEPPER
 JONES, and KATRINA WEST,
             Defendants.


                                              ORDER

        Before the court is the Government and defendants Aleta Necole Thomas, Pepper Jones,

 and Katrina West’s Joint Motion to Continue Deadlines and New Scheduling Order [Doc. 40]. For

 the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted.

        On May 20, 2021, a grand jury returned an indictment charging defendant Aleta Nicole

 Thomas with five counts of False Statement to a Financial Institution, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

 § 1014, along with a Forfeiture Allegation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2). [Doc. 2]. On July

 20, 2021, the grand jury returned a superseding indictment charging Jones and West, along with

 Thomas. [Doc. 17]. Thomas was charged with an additional eight counts of False Statement to a

 Financial Institution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014, and two counts of Aggravated Identity

 Theft, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1). Jones was charged jointly with Thomas in two of the

 counts of False Statement to a Financial Institution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. West was

 charged in two separate counts of False Statement to a Financial Institution, in violation of 18

 U.S.C. § 1014.     The superseding indictment also included Forfeiture allegations as to all

 defendants, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 982(a)(2), 1028(b)(5).
Case 4:21-cr-00239-GKF            Document 45 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 09/07/21              Page 2 of 4




        The court entered a Scheduling Order [Doc. 12], which was most recently amended by

 Order on July 28, 2021 [Doc. 38], after the issuance of the superseding indictment. The Amended

 Scheduling Order [Doc. 38] set the following deadlines:

  Motions Due                                          August 11, 2021

  Responses Due                                        August 25, 2021

  PT/CP/Motions Hearing                                September 8, 2021 at 9:30 a.m.

  Voir Dire, Jury Instructions,                        September 13, 2021
  and Trial Briefs Due
  Jury Trial                                           September 20, 2021 at 9:30 a.m.


        In their joint motion, the parties move the court to continue all scheduling order dates,

 including the jury trial, until December 2021. [Doc. 40]. In support of this, the parties explain

 that there is “voluminous” discovery in this matter, including approximately ten gigabits of

 information. [Doc. 40, p. 2]. Both the Government and Defendants need time to fully review and

 analyze all the discovery produced to date. [Id.]. Additionally, the parties would like to engage in

 further plea negotiations. [Id.]. Thomas, Jones, and West have each filed written waivers of their

 right to a speedy trial and ask that the requested continuance be excluded from Speedy Trial Act

 calculations. [Docs. 42-44]. The Government also joins in the request to continue. [Doc. 40, p.

 1].

        Section 3161(h)(7)(A) of the Speedy Trial Act permits a federal district court to exclude

 any period of delay resulting from a continuance if “the judge granted such continuance on the

 basis of his findings that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest

 of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). A court must orally

 or in writing set forth its reasons for granting an ends of justice continuance and make findings

 that a continuance is in the best interest of the defendant and the public. Id. In cases that are not

                                                   2
Case 4:21-cr-00239-GKF         Document 45 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 09/07/21                 Page 3 of 4




 so unusual or complex as to fall within clause (ii) of § 3161(h)(7)(B), the court shall consider

 whether failure to grant the continuance “would deny the defendant reasonable time to obtain

 counsel, would unreasonably deny the defendant or the Government continuity of counsel, or

 would deny counsel for the defendant or the attorney for the Government the reasonable time

 necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.” 18 U.S.C.

 § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). In cases involving multiple defendants, such as this, any “reasonable period

 of delay” excludable as to one defendant is excludable as to his or her codefendants. 18 U.S.C.

 § 3161(h)(6); see also United States v. Tranakos, 911 F.2d 1422, 1426 (10th Cir. 1990).

        In United States v. Toombs, 574 F.3d 1262 (10th Cir. 2009), the Tenth Circuit limited the

 circumstances in which an ends of justice continuance can be granted and emphasized that it should

 be a rarely used procedural tool. The parties must provide the district court with a sufficient record

 to determine why the facts stated in a motion for continuance “result[] in the need for additional

 time.” Id. at 1271. This requires the parties to provide specific information about the need for a

 continuance, and the district court may need to hold a hearing before granting an ends of justice

 continuance. Id. at 1272-73. A district court must also give significant weight to the public’s

 interest in a speedy trial, and the public’s interest is generally served by strict adherence to the

 requirements of the Speedy Trial Act. Id. at 1273.

        Taking into account the exercise of due diligence, the court finds that the failure to grant

 the requested continuance would deny the parties the reasonable time necessary for effective

 preparation, as it would significantly inhibit their ability to analyze the substantial amount of

 discovery material in this case. It would also unduly limit the opportunity for continued plea

 negotiations.




                                                   3
Case 4:21-cr-00239-GKF            Document 45 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 09/07/21            Page 4 of 4




        The court therefore finds that the ends of justice served by granting the requested

 continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

        IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ Joint Motion to Continue Deadlines and

 New Scheduling Order [Doc. 40] is granted. All deadlines in the current scheduling order [Doc.

 38], including the Jury Trial set for September 20, 2021, are stricken. The following amended

 scheduling order is hereby entered:



  Motions Due                                         November 8, 2021

  Responses Due                                       November 22, 2021

  PT/CP/Motions Hearing                               December 8, 2021 at 9:30 a.m.

  Voir Dire, Jury Instructions,                       December 13, 2021
  and Trial Briefs Due
  Jury Trial                                          December 20, 2021 at 9:30 a.m.


        IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that September 20, 2021, through December 20, 2021, shall

 be excluded from any Speedy Trial calculations.

        IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of September, 2021.




                                                  4


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.oknd.57939.45.0.pdf

Size

189,778 bytes

SHA-256

0015362c37ab63c908bb41768c59adee117e241df9cd0c46760a00d2170dcd3c

Our copy

gov.uscourts.oknd.57939.45.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)