United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER (1) EXTENDING BRIEFING DEADLINE DATES AND (2)
DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO READDRESS (ECF #345) AND
REQUESTS TO READDRESS (ECF ## 341, 342, 343, 346)
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Court held a continued evidentiary hearing on Defendant
Curtis Scott’s motion for a new trial on March 12,
2018. At the end of the hearing, the Court asked
Scott’s standby counsel to order the transcript of that
hearing, mail it to Scott, and file a certificate of service
with the Court. (See 3/12/2018 Tr. at 158:4-158:12,
ECF #344 at Pg. ID 4166.) The Court then directed Scott to
file his post-hearing brief in support of his motion for a
new trial within 21 days after the transcript was mailed; the
Court directed the Government to file a response within 21
days after Scott filed his response. (See Id. at
158:13-158:15, 160:24-161:3, Pg. ID 4166, 4168-69.)
standby counsel has filed a certificate of service in which
he certifies that he served a copy of the March 12, 2018
evidentiary hearing transcript by mail on Scott on March 28,
2018. (See ECF #347.) Scott’s standby counsel
has also sent an email to the Court passing along a request
by Scott for two additional weeks to prepare and file his
brief. Standby counsel reports that the Government does not
oppose the requested extension.
request for an extension is GRANTED. Scott
shall file his post-hearing brief in support of his motion
for a new trial by not later than May 2,
2018. The Government shall file any response
by not later than June 6, 2018.
has also filed a motion and various letters requesting that
the Court reconvene the evidentiary hearing so that he may
readdress the Court. (See Mot. to Address, ECF #345;
Letters, ECF ## 341, 342, 343, 346.) Scott argues that the
Court should resume the hearing because he did not have his
prescribed medication on the day of the hearing, and the lack
of medication interfered with his mental ability to think
clearly at the hearing.
Court DENIES Scott’s motion and
requests to reconvene the evidentiary hearing. During the
hearing, the Court specifically confirmed with Scott that he
was able to proceed despite the
absence of his medication:
THE COURT: Mr. Scott, I understand that the last time we were
scheduled to be here, you had a health concern. Are you
THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, a little bit.
THE COURT: Were you able -- are you able to proceed this
THE DEFENDANT: Yes. I just need my medication.
THE COURT: What medication?
THE DEFENDANT: The lisinopril and keflex.
THE COURT: Are you able to proceed -- I don't have
medication with me right now. Are you able to