No. 21-1313

Martin Gottesfeld v. United States

Lower Court: First Circuit
Docketed: 2022-04-01
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: appellate-review circuit-conflict circuit-split due-process judicial-discretion judicial-recusal procedural-due-process speedy-trial-act statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a different judge can make the requisite 'ends of justice' findings to support a continuance under the Speedy Trial Act

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

question presented is: 1. Under the Speedy Trial Act, if one judge grants an “ends of justice” continuance but fails to explain why, whether a different judge can make the requisite findings to support the continuance. The case also presents an independent question regarding the proper application of 28 U.S.C. 455 in district courts: (I) Il 2. Whether, when confronted with specific allegations supporting judicial disclosure and disqualification, a district court exceeds its discretion by denying a disqualification motion without any explanation or disclosure necessary to facilitate meaningful appellate review.

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-07-26
Reply of petitioner Martin Gottesfeld filed. (Distributed)
2022-07-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-07-01
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2022-05-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including July 1, 2022.
2022-05-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 1, 2022 to July 1, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-04-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 1, 2022.
2022-04-28
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 2, 2022 to June 1, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-03-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 2, 2022)

Attorneys

Martin Gottesfeld
Daniel L. GeyserHaynes and Boone, LLP, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent