Motion to Exclude Time Pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act — United States v. Ryan Dales (Dkt. 24)

Summary

The government's Motion to Exclude Time Pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act in United States v. Ryan Dales, Criminal No. GLR-23-026, Document 24 in Case 1:23-cr-00026-GLR, filed March 13, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. It moves to exclude time under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) and states that an indictment returned January 25, 2023 charges Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and Possession of a Firearm by Prohibited Person (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)). It says defense counsel consents to tolling from March 3, 2023 through April 17, 2023, to allow review of discovery and plea discussions. The motion cites 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and says a proposed order is attached. The signature block names Erek L. Barron and Paul A. Riley.

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

“Motion to Exclude Time Pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act — United States v. Ryan Dales (Dkt. 24).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-mdd-529188-24-0-66d4e8bac7/, SHA-256 fdc2010295c14a3e17b7cea2b86dd5abccfe8449a4c8d2cc6373c8e782353b87.

Full text

Case 1:23-cr-00026-GLR Document 24 Filed 03/13/23 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA *
*
v. *
* CRIMINAL NO. GLR-23-026
RYAN DALES, *
*
Defendant. *
*
*******
MOTION TO EXCLUDE TIME
PURSUANT TO THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

The United States of America, by and through its counsel, Erek L. Barron, the United States

Attorney for the District of Maryland, and Paul A. Riley, Assistant United States Attorney for the

District of Maryland, respectfully submits this Motion to Exclude Time Pursuant to the Speedy

Trial Act, and moves to exclude time from the speedy trial calculation pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C.

§ 3161(h).

1. On January 25, 2023, a federal grand jury sitting in the District of Maryland

returned an indictment charging Defendant Ryan Dales with Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and

Possession of a Firearm by Prohibited Person (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)).

2. On January 30, 2023, Defendant had his initial appearance and arraignment on the

Indictment, and substantial discovery has to date been provided to the defense.

3. The Government has proposed tolling the speedy trial clock to allow the defense to

review discovery and assess the case and for the parties to begin to conduct discussions regarding

resolution on this matter short of trial.

4. Further, counsel for the Defendant has advised that counsel consents to the tolling

of the Speedy Trial Act for a period from March 3, 2023 through April 17, 2023.
Case 1:23-cr-00026-GLR Document 24 Filed 03/13/23 Page 2 of 3

5. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) provides support for the sought exclusion of time. It

specifically excludes from the speedy trial time requirements “any period of delay resulting from

a continuance granted . . . at the request of the defendant or his counsel or at the request of the

attorney or the Government, 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.”

6. “[D]elays resulting from plea negotiations” are excludable as delays “resulting

from other proceedings concerning the defendant” within the meaning of § 3161(h)(1). United

States v. Ford, 288 F. App’x 54, 57-58 (4th Cir. 2008) (summary order) (citing 18 U.S.C.

§ 3161(h); United States v. Bowers, 834 F.2d 607, 610 (6th Cir. 1987) and United States v.

Montoya, 827 F.2d 143, 150 (7th Cir. 1987)); see also United States v. Leftenant, 341 F.3d 338,

344-45 (4th Cir. 2003) (“other proceedings” include plea negotiations between the parties).

7. Moreover, a number of courts have held that continuances to permit additional time

for plea negotiations are proper under § 3161(h)(7)—the provision of the Speedy Trial Act

authorizing continuances where doing so will serve “the ends of justice.” See, e.g., United States

v. Fabian, 798 F. Supp. 2d 647, 673 (D. Md. 2011) (“[A]n ‘ends of justice’ exclusion is intended

to cover any of various circumstances, including where . . . the government and the defendant are

engaged in ongoing plea negotiations.”) (citations omitted); United States v. Fields, 39 F.3d 439,

445 (3d Cir. 1994) (“Nothing in the language of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8) suggests that an ‘ends of

justice’ continuance may not be granted for this purpose. . . . In current federal practice, plea

negotiations play a vital role. We therefore see no reason why an ‘ends of justice’ continuance may

not be granted in appropriate circumstances to permit plea negotiations to continue.”).

2
Case 1:23-cr-00026-GLR Document 24 Filed 03/13/23 Page 3 of 3

8. In light of the foregoing facts, the Government respectfully requests that the Court

issue an Order finding that the interests of justice served by excluding the time from March 3, 2023

through April 17, 2023, including preparation for trial and discussions about a potential resolution

of the case without a trial, outweighs the Defendant’s and the public’s interests in a speedy trial.

See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7).

9. A proposed Order for the Court’s consideration is attached.

Respectfully submitted,

Erek L. Barron
United States Attorney

By: /s/
Paul A. Riley
Assistant United States Attorney
36 S. Charles Street, Fourth Floor
Baltimore, MD 21201
(410) 209-4800 (phone)
(410) 962-3091 (fax)

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.mdd.529188.24.0.pdf
Size: 96,566 bytes
SHA-256: fdc2010295c14a3e17b7cea2b86dd5abccfe8449a4c8d2cc6373c8e782353b87
Our copy: gov.uscourts.mdd.529188.24.0.pdf
Original: No public link identified.