Defendant's Motion to Continue Trial — U.S. v. Merritts

Full text

          Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC              Document 56           Filed 01/06/26        Page 1 of 4




                                  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                  FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                               )
     Plaintiff,                                         )
                                                        )
v.                                                      )   No. 1:25-CR-76-JMC
                                                        )
CORTNEY MERRITTS,                                       )
    Defendant.                                          )

                          DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

        Defendant Cortney Merritts, by and through his undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court

to continue the trial in this case.

        When the defense appeared for the pretrial conference of this case, the defense correctly announced

to this Court it was ready for trial and that Merritts intended to proceed to trial on January 12, 2026 as currently

docketed. Since then, based on discovery not disclosed until December 2025 and conduct by the Government

that did not occur until December 2025, the parties have engaged in extensive motion practice that remains

unresolved but critical to resolve before a jury is sworn in this case.

        As it stands, three critical motions remain pending before this Court: (1) a motion to disqualify; (2) a

motion to reconsider the previously-filed motion to dismiss for selective prosecution and to reconsider this

Court’s previous rulings concerning former Congresswoman Cori Bush based on what the evidentiary record

actually establishes; and (3) a motion to disclose confidential tax return and return information obtained via

an ex parte order that the Government already illegally disclosed in violation of Section 6103 but that the

Government now seeks leave to further disclose at trial.

        As to the motion to disqualify, the Government has thus far remained silent and not yet filed a

response and the current trial date would not provide the defense sufficient time to file a reply, for this Court

to hold oral argument on the motion, and for this Court to issue a reasoned ruling before the jury is sworn

given the likelihood of appellate review regardless of who the prevailing party is, as Federal Rule of Criminal

Procedure 12 requires. It seems the more prudent course is to continue the trial of this matter, to permit the

parties the time necessary to fully brief and argue the merits of the complex issues, and to give this Court all
                                                        1
          Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC                Document 56          Filed 01/06/26         Page 2 of 4



the time it needs to arrive at an appropriate resolution of the motion.

        As to the motion to reconsider, the parties have now fully briefed the issues but given just how

important the issues are and the fact that this is a dispositive motion that would obviate the need for a jury

trial in the first place, the defense is concerned the current trial date does not give this Court sufficient time to

fully and fairly resolve this motion—and to do so with the benefit of oral argument. Indeed, while the defense

maintains that dismissal is the appropriate remedy given the record that is already before this Court, at a bare

minimum further discovery on the issue is warranted based on the case law in this Circuit and the parties

would need sufficient time to conduct that additional discovery.

        As to the motion to disclose, the motion remains pending but the Court has not yet ruled. To be clear,

this is not the pro forma motion of the type the Government has attempted to frame. This Court could, inter

alia, permit a limited disclosure to the extent necessary for purposes of the jury trial or exclude this evidence

outright—but it is completely unnecessary for the Court to permit wholesale disclosure of the tax returns of a

former Congresswoman’s husband considering Mrs. Bush is now running for congressional office.

        To be clear, the Speedy Trial Act is currently tolled given the pendency of motions before this Court

and, in any event, this Court can and should find that the ends of justice served by continuing this trial

outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

        Ultimately, this is a profoundly important case and critical legal and factual issues remain pending

before this Court. Thus, to give both the parties and this Court sufficient time to litigate these issues and to

resolve them fairly and thoroughly, Merritts respectfully requests that this Court vacate the current trial setting

and reschedule this trial to a date in the future that works for all parties in the event it needs to proceed to trial.




                                                         2
Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC   Document 56     Filed 01/06/26   Page 3 of 4



                            Respectfully submitted,

                            Margulis Gelfand DiRuzzo & Lambson

                             /s/ Justin K. Gelfand
                            JUSTIN K. GELFAND
                            JOSEPH A. DIRUZZO, III
                            7700 Bonhomme Avenue, Ste. 750
                            St. Louis, MO 63105
                            Telephone: 314.390.0234
                            Facsimile: 314.485.2264
                            justin@margulisgelfand.com
                            jd@margulisgelfand.com




                               3
       Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC          Document 56        Filed 01/06/26      Page 4 of 4



                                     Certificate of Service

      I hereby certify that the foregoing was filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court to be

served by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system upon the Office of the United States

Attorney and all other counsel in this case.


                                                /s/ Justin K. Gelfand
                                               JUSTIN K. GELFAND
                                               JOSEPH A. DIRUZZO, III
                                               7700 Bonhomme Avenue, Ste. 750
                                               St. Louis, MO 63105
                                               Telephone: 314.390.0234
                                               Facsimile: 314.485.2264
                                               justin@margulisgelfand.com
                                               jd@margulisgelfand.com




                                                  4


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.dcd.278640.56.0.pdf

Size

143,873 bytes

SHA-256

654a12d066a974f18211b5069dfdecbf577b404a193985cef36384d6770f784c

Our copy

gov.uscourts.dcd.278640.56.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)