{"id":"court_sdny_100_0","court":"SDNY","case_no":"","doc_number":100,"sub_number":null,"doc_type":"DOC","filed_date":"2023-06-29","title":"SDNY ECF 100","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"USDC SDNY\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT D OCUMENT\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DOC #: __________________\nDATE FILED: _6/29/2023_____\n-against-\n23 Cr. 118 (AT)\nHO WAN KWOK and YANPING WANG,\nAMENDED ORDER\nDefendants.\nANALISA TORRES, District Judge:\nOn June 6, 2023, the Court held a status conference in this matter. Dkt. Entry 6/6/2023.\nAmong other things, the Court set a trial date of April 8, 2024, and excluded time between June 6,\n2023, and April 8, 2024, under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. June 6, 2023 Tr. 4:18, 8:12-\n18, ECF No. 88.\nThe Speedy Trial Act states that time may be excluded if the Court finds “that the ends of\njustice served . . . outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.” 18\nU.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court must “set[] forth, in the record of the case, either orally or in\nwriting, its reasons for finding that the ends of justice served . . . outweigh the best interests of the\npublic and the defendant in a speedy trial.” Id. The Court must consider, inter alia, whether the\ncomplexity of the case makes it “unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings\nor for the trial itself within the time limits established” by the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C.\n§3161(h)(7)(B)(ii), and whether a failure to exclude time “would deny counsel for the defendant or\nthe attorney for the Government the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation,” 18 U.S.C.\n§3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).\nAt the June 6, 2023 conference, the Government moved to exclude time because the parties\nneed time to review discovery, prepare and file motions, prepare for trial, and discuss potential pre-\ntrial resolution. June 6, 2023 Tr. 7:20-24. Defendants opposed the exclusion of time. Id. 8:10-11.\nThe Court considered all relevant factors and stated on the record that “the ends of justice served by\nexcluding [the time between June 6, 2023, and April 8, 2024,] outweigh the interests of the public\nand the defendants in a speedy trial because this will allow time for the prosecution to finish\nproducing discovery, for the defense to consider it, to file motions, and for the parties to discuss a\npossible disposition.” Id. 8:12-18.\nThe Court finds that the complexity of this case makes it “unreasonable to expect adequate\npreparation for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the time limits established” by the\nSpeedy Trial Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii). Additionally, exclusion is warranted under 18\nU.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) because a failure to exclude time would deny the parties “the reasonable\ntime necessary for effective preparation.”\nThis case involves twelve counts against three defendants, one of whom remains at large. See\nSuperseding Indictment, ECF No. 19. The indictment alleges multiple interrelated fraudulent\nschemes over the course of approximately five years, involving the use of approximately 500 bank\n\naccounts and at least eighty entities or individuals in several countries. Id. ¶¶ 1–3. This case\ninvolves thousands of victims. See ECF No. 10 at 4. The parties have indicated that trial will take up\nto seven weeks. June 6, 2023 Tr. 4:8-20. Discovery is extensive and involves classified information.\nSee ECF No. 30 at 2 n.2. The Government has exercised due diligence in producing discovery, and,\nas of June 6, 2023, has produced approximately ten terabytes of data, or approximately two million\npages of documents, and extracted and produced thirty-seven electronic devices. June 6, 2023 Tr.\n2:24–3:3. The Government is still in the process of extracting and producing electronic devices,\nwhich will take approximately eight weeks. Id. 3:3-11. The Government’s investigation is ongoing,\nand it is producing additional materials on a rolling basis. Id. 3:12-15. Discovery includes various\nvideos, Excel files, and complex financial records in both Mandarin and English. See ECF No. 80 at\n1. Further, by December 15, 2023, the Government shall file a motion under the Classified\nInformation Procedures Act, 18 U.S.C. App. 3 § 4, on the basis of which the Court shall determine\nwhether specific classified information may be deleted from documents produced to Defendants.\nJune 6, 2023 Tr. 4:22-25. Therefore, this case is complex under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) and\nexclusion of time is appropriate to ensure sufficient time for adequate preparation. See United States\nv. DiTommaso, 817 F.2d 201, 210 (2d Cir. 1987) (finding that a multi-defendant, international money\nlaundering case involving extensive discovery in a foreign language and witnesses in various\ncountries was complex under § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii)); see also United States v. Bursey, 801 Fed. App’x\n1, 2–3 (2d Cir. 2020) (summary order) (finding that time was properly excluded where the parties\nneeded time to file motions and to review voluminous discovery).\nDue to the complexity of this case, the voluminous discovery involved, and the need for\nsufficient time to prepare and file pretrial motions,1 June 6, 2023 Tr. 5:2-20, 7:2-3, the Court\ndetermined that exclusion of time from June 6, 2023, to April 8, 2024, would serve the ends of justice,\nand that the ends of justice served outweighed the interests of the public and Defendants in a speedy\ntrial.\nSO ORDERED.\nDated: June 29, 2023\nNew York, New York\n1 This order amends the order entered on June 26, 2023, ECF No. 93, to delete the following language: “defense counsel\nrequested a trial date in early April 2024.” See ECF No. 96.\n2","body_zh":null,"key_entities":[],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":895,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-06-29 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-06-29","updated_at":"2026-07-06 17:58:03"}