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. Davis

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Savannah Division

October 1, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
STAFON JAMAR DAVIS

          AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

          Christopher L. Ray, United States Magistrate Judge

         At the Status Conference on September 16, 2019, the parties indicated that additional time might be necessary for defendant to adequately review the Government's discovery and gather mitigating evidence to present to the United States Attorney General. Doc. 106. They now move, jointly, to modify the Scheduling Order[1] (doc. 102) in this case. Doc. 107. The Court has considered the parties' submission, GRANTS the motion (doc. 107), and adopts the proposed deadlines as follows:

DATE

DEADLINE

November 1, 2019

-- Defendant's Notice of Alibi Defense Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12.2

-- Defendant's Notice of Insanity Defense and/or Expert Evidence of a Mental Condition Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12.2(a)-(b)

November 15, 2019

-- Motions Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)

-- Government's Request for Mental Examination Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12.2(c)(1)(B)

December 16, 2019

-- Responses to Motions Filed Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)

February 4, 2020

-- Defendant's Submission of Evidence in Mitigation to U.S. Attorney's Office

February 18, 2020

-- Government's Submission to United States Department of Justice of Memorandum and U.S. Attorney Recommendation re: Death Penalty

March 4, 2020

-- Government's Notice Pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 702 and Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(G)

April 6, 2020

-- Defendant's Notice Pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 702 and Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(b)(1)(C)

April 20, 2020

-- Government's Supplemental Expert Notice Pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 702 and Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(G)

May 20, 2020

-- Parties' Notice Pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 404(b), 609, 807 and 902

-- Motions for Judicial Notice

-- Trial Stipulations

June 1, 2020

-- Government's Notice of Intent to Seek or Not Seek Death Penalty

         The Court also adopts the parties' proposals for tentative deadlines for pre-trial procedures. If the U.S. Attorney General elects to seek the death penalty, the Court will revisit the remainder of this scheduling order with the parties to address motions pertaining to capital punishment. Although the deadlines are tentative, as they are calculated based on the days before an as-yet-undetermined trial date, the Court emphasizes that they are purely provisional and subject to the modification at the discretion of the District Judge. The tentative pre-trial deadlines are adopted as follows:

Trial-120

-- Pretrial Motions in Limine

Trial-106

-- Responses to Motions in Limine

Trial-99

-- Replies in Support of Motions in Limine

Trial-90

-- Hearing on Motions in Limine and Pretrial Admission of Evidence

Trial-30

-- Supplemental Hearing on Pretrial Admission of Evidence, if Needed

-- Additional Stipulations

Trial-21

-- Proposed Voir Dire and Jury Instructions

-- Remaining Giglio/Jencks/Fed. R. Crim. P. 26.2 Disclosures

Trial-14

-- Objections to Proposed Voir Dire and Jury Instructions

Trial-8

-- Trial Memoranda (if needed)

-- Parties' witness and exhibit lists emailed to Courtroom Deputy (in PDF and Word formats)

-- Parties' trial exhibits in electronic format (on USB drive) to Courtroom Deputy

Trial-7

-- Pretrial Conference

Trial

-- Trial

         Since this case has been previously designated complex, the statutory time limits imposed by 18 U.S.C. § 1361 for pretrial proceedings are tolled. Doc. 49.

         SO ORDERED.

---------

Notes:

[1] The Court adopted the parties' proposed Scheduling Order at the same time it granted the Government's Motion for Reciprocal Discovery. Doc. 102. Although that Order functioned as a Scheduling Order, it was not docketed as such, and the parties' motion to adopt their proposed scheduling order remains pending. Doc. 64. Since that motion was implicitly granted, doc. 102, and since the Court now adopts an ...


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.