Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

United States v. Wedding

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 30, 2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
RYAN WEDDING, DEFENDANT.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Defendant's counsel moves for reconsideration of this court's October 28, 2009 Order confirming the November 16, 2009 trial date. "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.... There may also be other, highly unusual circumstances warranting reconsideration." " School Dist. N. 1J Multnomah Cty. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). Defendant fails to satisfy this standard for reconsideration.

Defense counsel again raises three basic arguments for a continuance. First, he argues that he is in trial in Los Angeles District Court with an anticipated completion date of the week of October 26, 2009. The court notes that this matter has been pending since June 13, 2008, virtually all discovery has been produced, the trial has already been continued on several occasions, and defense counsel has had an adequate opportunity to prepare for trial over the past 17 months. Second, Defense counsel argues that he needs further impeachment materials on co-defendant Shirani concerning his "involvement in a Canadian murder case." (Motion at p.2:13-14). The court notes that the Government produced to defendant on May 19, 2009 the FBI report summarizing information given by co-defendant Shirani to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. As set forth in a separate order, the redactions to the FBI report are appropriate and do not contain any material impeachment matters, or represents cumulative materials already produced. Finally, Defense counsel argues that he requires discovery of the telephone calls of co-defendant Shirani made from the Metropolitan Correctional Center. Again, by separate order, the court has reviewed those calls and concludes that the calls are not discoverable and contain no material impeachment evidence.

In sum, the motion for reconsideration is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20091030

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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