Opinion Tom Schanzle-Haskins, U.S. Magistrate Judge — No. 3:20-cr-30045 (Dkt. 43, C.D. Ill.)

Summary

An Opinion by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins, entered May 13, 2021 in the Central District of Illinois, Springfield Division (Case 3:20-cr-30045-SEM-TSH, document 43), United States v. Qwanell Jones. The court allows in part the defendant's Motion to 120 Day Speedy Trial, noting that the Speedy Trial Act already entitles him to a speedy trial, and that his pending motion to suppress must be heard on June 15, 2021, so trial is continued to August 3, 2021. It denies as moot his Motion to Exclude the Probable Cause Affidavit because the grand jury's Indictment charging drug possession with intent to distribute, a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking and felon in possession conclusively determines probable cause.

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

                   3:20-cr-30045-SEM-TSH # 43    Page 1 of 3
                                                                                    E-FILED
                                                           Friday, 14 May, 2021 12:14:29 PM
                                                               Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

           IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
      CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, SPRINGFIELD DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
                          )
         Plaintiff,       )
                          )
    v.                    )               Case No. 20-cr-30045
                          )
QWANELL JONES,            )
                          )
         Defendant.       )

                                  OPINION

TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE:

      This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Qwanell Jones’

Motion to 120 Day Speedy Trial [35] (Speedy Trial Motion) and Motion to

Exclude Probable Cause Affidavit [37] (Motion to Exclude).      For the

reasons stated, the Speedy Trial Motion is ALLOWED in part, and the

Motion to Exclude is DENIED as moot.

Speedy Trial Motion

      Jones is entitled to a speedy trial under the Speedy Trial Act without

filing a motion. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1). Jones will receive a speedy trial in

accordance with the Speedy Trial Act. The Court understands that Jones

will not consent to any continuances and will not agree to any hearings by

videoconference. Speedy Trial Motion; Minute Entry entered April 19,



                                 Page 1 of 3
                    3:20-cr-30045-SEM-TSH # 43    Page 2 of 3




2021. Jones has also filed a pending motion entitled “995 Motion, Proposal

for Dismissal, Motion to Quash Arrest & Motion to Suppress Evidence”

(d/e 36) (Motion to Suppress). The Motion to Suppress must be set for an

evidentiary hearing and must be resolved before this matter can proceed to

trial. The Motion to Suppress has been set for an in-person hearing on

June 15, 2021. Text Order entered May 11, 2021. The Speedy Trial Act

authorizes a delay in the trial to hold hearings on such motions and to

resolve such motions. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D). The trial has been

continued to August 3, 2021 accordingly. Text Order Entered May 11,

2021.

Motion to Exclude

        Jones asks the Court to exclude the Affidavit accompanying the

Criminal Complaint [1] in this matter. Jones argues that the Affidavit

contains false accusations. The validity of the Affidavit is now moot

because the grand jury issued an Indictment (d/e 12). The grand jury

charged Jones with possession of methamphetamine and cocaine with the

intent to distribute it (Count 1), in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and

841(b)(1)(C); possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking

crime (Count 2), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); and felon in possession

of a firearm and ammunition (Count 3), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1),

                                  Page 2 of 3
                     3:20-cr-30045-SEM-TSH # 43   Page 3 of 3




all of which are alleged to have occurred within the Central District of

Illinois. The grand jury, therefore, conclusively determined that probable

cause exists to support these charges. See Kayley v United States, 571

U.S. 320, 328 (2014) (“[A]n indictment ‘fair upon its face,’ and returned by a

‘properly constituted grand jury,’ we have explained, ‘conclusively

determines the existence of probable cause’ to believe the defendant

perpetrated the offense alleged.”) (quoting Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103,

117 n. 19 (1975)). Because the grand jury has determined that probable

cause exists to support the charges in the Indictment, the validity of the

Affidavit is moot.

      THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Qwanell Jones’

Motion to 120 Day Speedy Trial (d/e 35) is ALLOWED, in part, and his

Motion to Exclude Probable Cause Affidavit (d/e 37) is DENIED as moot.

ENTER: May 13, 2021

                             s/ Tom Schanzle-Haskins
                             TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS
                         UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE




                                  Page 3 of 3


File and source

File

43.pdf

Size

86,684 bytes

SHA-256

7d4e7ed872d5c3f7ce0823222e7947ff5f5ad594fceea551e4b75d3238da7de1

Our copy

43.pdf

Original

No public link identified.