Case 3:14-cr-00091-MCR Document 153 Filed 03/20/15 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.

CASE NO.

3:14cr91/MCR

KENT E. HOVIND and PAUL JOHN HANSEN

GOVERNMENT’S NOTICE OF INTENT TO PROCEED TO TRIAL COMES NOW the United States of America and files this Notice of Intent to Proceed to Trial on remaining counts in the Superseding Indictment. 1.

On or about March 2, 2015, a jury was selected in the above entitled and

numbered case on the six-count Superseding Indictment. (Docs. 28 & 142). 2.

On or about March 12, 2015, the jury returned guilty verdicts on Count

Three against defendant Kent E. Hovind, and Counts Five and Six against defendant Paul John Hansen. (Docs. 142 & 145). Sentencing is scheduled on said counts for June 12, 2015. (Doc. 145). The jury returned a not guilty verdict as to Hansen on Count Two. (Docs. 142 & 145). The jury was unable to reach a verdict as to Hovind on Counts One, Two, and Four, and as to Hansen on Counts One and Four. (Docs. 142 & 145). 3.

On or about March 16, 2015, the Court entered an Order declaring a

mistrial as to Hovind on Counts One, Two, and Four of the Superseding Indictment.

Case 3:14-cr-00091-MCR Document 153 Filed 03/20/15 Page 2 of 3

(Doc. 150). On or about March 17, 2015, the Court entered an Amended Order and Judgment of Acquittal on Jury Verdict as to Hansen.1 (Doc. 152). As a part of the Court’s Amended Order, the Court declared a mistrial as to Hansen on Counts One and Four of the Superseding Indictment. (Doc. 152). 4.

At this time, the government hereby files this notice of intent to proceed to

trial as to Counts One, Two, and Four against Hovind, and as to Counts One and Four against Hansen. 5.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(e) provides, “If the defendant

is to be tried again following a declaration by the trial judge of a mistrial . . . , the trial shall commence within seventy days from the date the action occasioning the retrial becomes final.”2 Seventy days from March 12, 2015, is May 21, 2015. 6.

Prior to filing this notice, the undersigned contacted counsel for Hovind

and Hansen to attempt to coordinate schedules and in order to avoid any scheduling conflicts.

As a result of that consultation, the government notifies the Court that

unavoidable scheduling conflicts exist for the parties’ counsel during the weeks of May 25th, June 8th, and June 15th.

Therefore, the government asks that the trial not be

scheduled during those time periods.

1

Said Order amended the Court’s March 16th Order and Judgment of Acquittal on Jury Verdict to include the jury’s verdict on Count Five. (Docs. 151 & 152). 2 Section 3161(e) further indicates that excludable periods identified in section 3161(h) continue to be excludable.

2

Case 3:14-cr-00091-MCR Document 153 Filed 03/20/15 Page 3 of 3

WHEREFORE, the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney files this notice with the Court. Respectfully submitted, PAMELA C. MARSH United States Attorney /s/ Tiffany H. Eggers TIFFANY H. EGGERS Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar Number 193968 21 E. Garden Street, Suite 400 Pensacola, Florida 32502-5675 (850) 444-4000 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been filed electronically using the Court’s CM/ECF system and therefore Thomas S. Keith and J. Christopher Klotz are scheduled to receive a copy of this notice on this 20th day of March, 2015. /s/ Tiffany H. Eggers TIFFANY H. EGGERS Assistant United States Attorney

3

Hovind ReTrial Notice.pdf

Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(e) provides, “If the defendant. is to be tried again following a declaration by the trial judge of a mistrial . . . , the trial.

26KB Sizes 0 Downloads 124 Views

Recommend Documents

Hovind Acquital May 18.pdf
... title on said properties without first. obtaining the advice of a licensed Florida attorney or an Order from the. Court. In violation of Title 18, United States Code, ...

Hovind May 18 ruling on governemtn motion.pdf
... of one charge of contempt, finding specifically that Hovind had violated just one of two court Orders. identified in Count Three of the Superseding Indictment. 2.