U.S. v. Napadow

In prosecution on wire and mail fraud charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to dismiss his indictment based on alleged Speedy Trial violation stemming from two delays caused by time set aside for filing pretrial motions and for preparing for trial. First delay could not be counted for speedy trial purposes under pretrial motion exclusion set forth in section 3161(h)(1)(D), even though no pretrial motions had actually been filed, and second continuance to prepare for trial was also excludable under ends-of-justice exclusion set forth in section 3161(h)(7)(A)) where defense counsel indicated that he was not ready for trial at earlier suggested date.