Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Trammer

United States District Court, D. New Mexico

August 12, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
ADRIAN TRAMMER, Defendant.

          Attorney for Plaintiff: Presiliano A Torrez

          Attorney for Defendant: Todd A. Coberly

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          MARTHA VÁZQUEZ UNITED STATES EZ STRICT JUDGE.

         THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Count 1 of the Indictment with Prejudice for Violation of the Speedy Trial Act [Doc. 87], filed July 3, 2019. For the reasons stated below, Defendant's motion is GRANTED in part. Count 1 is dismissed without prejudice.

         BACKGROUND

         On March 23, 2016, an indictment was returned against Defendant with three counts. Doc. 5. Count 1 charged Defendant with Felon in Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). Id.

         The Court granted Defendant's motion to sever Count 1 [Doc. 36] on August 15, 2018. Doc. 47. In its Order, the Court stated: “By separate Order, the Court will set a date for Defendant Trammer to be tried on Count 1 of the indictment.” Id. The Court, however, did not do so.

         On July 3, 2019, Defendant filed the subject motion requesting the Court “dismiss Count 1 of the indictment with prejudice on the ground that [Defendant's] rights under the Speedy Trial Act (“STA”), 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq., have been violated.” Doc. 87 at 1.

         LAW

         “The Speedy Trial Act is designed to protect a criminal defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial and serve the public interest in bringing prompt criminal proceedings.” United States v. Toombs, 574 F.3d 1262, 1268 (10th Cir. 2009) (quoting United States v. Thompson, 524 F.3d 1126, 1131 (10th Cir. 2008)). It requires that a defendant's trial start “within seventy days” from the filing of the indictment or the defendant's initial appearance, whichever occurs last. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1). Excluded from the seventy-day requirement is “[a]ny period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any judge . . . 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.” Id. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

         If a defendant is not brought to trial within seventy days, as extended by the excluded time, the “indictment shall be dismissed on motion of the defendant.” Id. § 3162(a)(2). “In determining whether to dismiss the case with or without prejudice, the court shall consider, among others, each of the following factors: the seriousness of the offense; the facts and circumstances of the case which led to the dismissal; and the impact of a reprosecution on the administration of [the Speedy Trial Act] and on the administration of justice.” Id.

         DISCUSSION

         I. The Speedy Trial Act Mandates Dismissal of Count 1

         Defendant was indicted on March 23, 2016. Doc. 5. Defendant's initial appearance was on September 29, 2017. Doc. 18. Defendant's initial appearance occurred after the indictment; therefore, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1), his initial appearance ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.