Order on Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial — United States v. Robert Keon Williams (Document 22)

Summary

An Order in United States v. Robert Keon Williams, Criminal Action No. 2:23cr310-MHT, Document 22, filed October 27, 2023, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division. It addresses the defendant's unopposed motion to continue trial, with jury selection and trial then set for November 13, 2023. The court states that a competency evaluation is underway and that counsel represents the parties cannot move forward with plea negotiations until concerns about competency are resolved. The order grants the motion and resets jury selection and trial for February 5, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. in Montgomery, Alabama. It carries the /s/ signature line of the United States District Judge.

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 2:23-cr-00310-MHT-SMD Document 22 Filed 10/27/23 Page 1 of 4



  IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

        MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                  )
                                          )         CRIMINAL ACTION NO.
        v.                                )            2:23cr310-MHT
                                          )                 (WO)
ROBERT KEON WILLIAMS                      )

                                     ORDER

       This cause is before the court on defendant Robert

Keon    Williams’s         unopposed      motion      to    continue        trial.

For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that

jury    selection     and        trial,       now   set    for    November     13,

2023,        should   be     continued          pursuant     to       18    U.S.C.

§ 3161(h).

       While the granting of a continuance is left to the

sound discretion of the trial judge, see United States

v. Stitzer, 785 F.2d 1506, 1516 (11th Cir. 1986), the

court    is     limited     by    the     requirements           of   the   Speedy

Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161.                   The Act provides in part:

       “In any case in which a plea of not guilty is
       entered, the trial of a defendant charged in
       an   information   or  indictment   with   the
       commission of an offense shall commence within
      Case 2:23-cr-00310-MHT-SMD Document 22 Filed 10/27/23 Page 2 of 4




      seventy days from the filing date (and making
      public) of the information or indictment, or
      from the date the defendant has appeared
      before a judicial officer of the court in
      which such charge is pending, whichever date
      last occurs.”

§ 3161(c)(1).        The Act excludes from the 70-day period

“[a]ny      period      of        delay ...          resulting       from         any

proceeding,       including        any    examinations,         to    determine

the    mental     competency        or       physical       capacity    of        the

defendant.”        § 3161(h)(1)(A).              It also excludes from

the 70-day period any period of delay resulting from a

continuance based on “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.”

§ 3161(h)(7)(A).             In     granting         a   continuance         under

subsection      (h)(7)(A),         the       court    may    consider,       among

other     factors,      whether          the    failure       to     grant        the

continuance       “would      be     likely          to ...    result        in     a

miscarriage of justice,” § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), or “would

deny counsel for the defendant or the attorney for the


                                         2
    Case 2:23-cr-00310-MHT-SMD Document 22 Filed 10/27/23 Page 3 of 4




Government the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation, taking into account the exercise of due

diligence,” § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

     The court concludes that, in this case, the ends of

justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the

interest of the public and Williams in a speedy trial.

A   competency      evaluation      of       Williams   is        currently

underway.    He has met with a forensic psychologist, who

has yet to issue a final report.                  Williams’s counsel

represents that the parties cannot move forward with

their   plea      negotiations      until       concerns       about      his

competency are resolved.          A continuance is warranted to

finalize    the    competency      evaluation       and      to     provide

Williams     an    opportunity         to    attempt      to      reach     a

satisfactory plea agreement.                Moreover, the government

does not oppose the motion.

                                       ***

     Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:



                                   3
      Case 2:23-cr-00310-MHT-SMD Document 22 Filed 10/27/23 Page 4 of 4




      (1) The       unopposed       motion      to    continue       trial

(Doc. 21) is granted.

      (2) The      jury    selection     and    trial,      now    set    for

November 13, 2023, are reset for February 5, 2024, at

10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 2FMJ of the Frank M. Johnson,

Jr.     United     States       Courthouse     Complex,      One    Church

Street, Montgomery, Alabama.

      The United States Magistrate Judge shall conduct a

pretrial conference prior to the new trial term and

shall      postpone       the    change-of-plea       and     any    other

appropriate deadlines.

      DONE, this the 27th day of October, 2023.

                                   /s/ Myron H. Thompson
                                UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE




                                     4


File and source

File

22.pdf

Size

73,831 bytes

SHA-256

8d7c6efc9492dc6106df174ad71592705d1cf355589b09ddf3329d664717b6ab

Our copy

22.pdf

Original

No public link identified.