Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Initial Status Report — United States v. Jasmine Murphy (Dkt. 15)

Initial Status Report — United States v. Jasmine Murphy (Dkt. 15)

Summary

An Initial Status Report, Document 15, filed February 5, 2025 in United States of America v. Jasmine Murphy, Criminal No. 24-CR-10379-RGS, in the United States District Court, District of Massachusetts. The report states that automatic discovery has been provided and the defendant is reviewing it. It states the court's view that the case does not warrant modification of the standard schedule and that it is too early to set a date for discovery or dispositive motions. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(A), it orders the Clerk to enter excludable time from February 6, 2025 through March 7, 2025, and schedules an interim status conference for March 7, 2025 at 11:30 a.m. It is signed Page Kelley, United States Magistrate 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

Cite this document

“Initial Status Report — United States v. Jasmine Murphy (Dkt. 15).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-mad-278747-15-0-d651f4c64a/, SHA-256 15fdfa9cc3449bafd75ea4fc7219d3bdc03d6925902ffa46932629ab9161e3fd.

Full text

       Case 1:24-cr-10379-RGS            Document 15        Filed 02/05/25       Page 1 of 2




                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                              DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

CRIMINAL NO.
24-CR-10379-RGS


                                UNITED STATES OF AMERICA


                                                 v.

                                       JASMINE MURPHY

                                  INITIAL STATUS REPORT

KELLEY, U.S.M.J.

       Defendant had an initial status conference scheduled for February 6, 2025. The parties

filed a joint status report requesting that the case be continued for an interim status conference.

(#14.) This court enters the following report and order.


       A.      Automatic discovery has been provided and defendant is reviewing it. Discovery
               is ongoing.

       B.      In this court's view, this is a case which does not warrant modification of the
               standard schedule.

       C.      It is too early to set a date for the filing of any discovery or dispositive motions.

       D.      With the agreement of the parties, this court finds and concludes, pursuant to the
               provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(A) that the interests of justice, i.e., review
               of the case, review of evidence, investigation, evaluation of discovery and
               dispositive motions, and consideration of alternatives concerning how best to
               proceed with this matter, outweighs the best interests of the public and the
               defendant for a trial within seventy days of the return of an indictment.
        Case 1:24-cr-10379-RGS              Document 15          Filed 02/05/25        Page 2 of 2




                 Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that, pursuant to the provisions of 18 U.S.C.
                 § 3161 (h)(7)(A) the Clerk of this Court enter excludable time for the period of
                 February 6, 2025, through March 7, 2025, under the Speedy Trial Act.1

        E. An Interim Status Conference is scheduled for March 7, 2025, at 11:30 a.m.


                                                     / s / Page Kelley
                                                   PAGE KELLEY
                                                   UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE




   1
      The parties are hereby advised that under the provisions of Rule 2(b) of the Rules for United States
Magistrates in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, any party may move for
reconsideration by a district judge of the determination(s) and order(s) set forth herein within ten (10)
days after receipt of a copy of this order, unless a different time is prescribed by this court or the district
judge. The party seeking reconsideration shall file with the Clerk of this Court, and serve upon all parties,
a written notice of the motion which shall specifically designate the order or part thereof to be
reconsidered and the basis for the objection thereto. The district judge, upon timely motion, shall
reconsider the magistrate's order and set aside any portion thereof found to be clearly erroneous in fact or
contrary to law. The parties are further advised that the United States Court of Appeals for this Circuit
has indicated that failure to comply with this rule shall preclude further appellate review. See Keating v.
Secretary of Health and Human Services, 848 F.2d 271 (1st Cir. 1988); United States v. Emiliano
Valencia-Copete, 792 F.2d 4 (1st Cir. 1986); Park Motor Mart, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 616 F.2d 603 (1st
Cir. 1980); United States v. Vega, 678 F.2d 376, 378-379 (1st Cir. 1982); Scott v. Schweiker, 702 F.2d 13,
14 (1st Cir. 1983); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S. Ct. 466 (1985).
                                                Page 2 of 2

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.mad.278747.15.0.pdf
Size
157,753 bytes
SHA-256
15fdfa9cc3449bafd75ea4fc7219d3bdc03d6925902ffa46932629ab9161e3fd
Our copy
gov.uscourts.mad.278747.15.0.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top