DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST. CROIX
5
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
5
5
Plaintiff,
5
2008-CR-0005-01
v.
5
5
REGGIE RITTER,
5
5
Defendant.
5
__________________________________________5
TO:
Alphonso G. Andrews, Jr., AUSA
Emile A. Henderson, III, Esq.
Eric S. Chancellor, Esq.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT REGGIE RITTER’S MOTION FOR SEVERANCE
THIS MATTER came before the Court for hearing September 12, 2008, upon
Defendant Reggie Ritter’s Motion For Severance (Docket No. 57).  The government was
represented by Alphonso G. Andrews, Jr., AUSA; Emile A. Henderson, III, Esq., appeared
on behalf of said Defendant, and Defendant also appeared.
Having reviewed the said motion, the government’s opposition thereto, and heard
oral arguments of counsel and being advised in the premises and upon due consideration
thereof, the Court will deny the said motion.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, while reviewing a Virgin
Islands case, recently cited with approval the standard articulated by the Fourth Circuit to
Case: 1:08-cr-00005-RLF-GWC   Document #: 67   Filed: 09/12/08   Page 1 of 3
United States v. Ritter
2008-CR-0005-01
Order Denying Defendant Reggie Ritter’s Motion For Severance
Page 2
be applied when a defendant moves for severance based upon the need for a co-
defendant’s testimony, stating that the
moving defendant must establish four things: (1) a bona fide need for the
testimony of his co-defendant; (2) the likelihood that the co-defendant would
testify at a second trial and waive his Fifth Amendment privilege; (3) the
substance of his co-defendant's testimony; and (4) the exculpatory nature and
effect of such testimony.
United States v. Bates, 46 Fed. Appx. 104, 109 n.3 (3d Cir. 2002) (citing United States v. Parodi,
703 F.2d 768, 779 (4 Cir. 1983).  The Court finds that Defendant Reggie Ritter has failed to
th
establish the second, third, and fourth enumerated elements.  When questioned by the
Court, counsel for Defendant Reggie Ritter admitted that he had not personally
interviewed co-Defendant Ernie Ritter and, therefore, could not assure the Court of the
likelihood that Ernie Ritter would waive his Fifth Amendment privilege nor provide the
Court with the substance of Ernie Ritter’s testimony and its exculpatory nature. 
Consequently, Defendant Reggie Ritter has failed to overcome the principle of judicial
economy.
WHEREFORE, it is now hereby ORDERED that Defendant Reggie Ritter’s Motion
For Severance (Docket No. 57) is DENIED.
Case: 1:08-cr-00005-RLF-GWC   Document #: 67   Filed: 09/12/08   Page 2 of 3
United States v. Ritter
2008-CR-0005-01
Order Denying Defendant Reggie Ritter’s Motion For Severance
Page 3
ENTER:
Dated: September 12, 2008
                                /s/                                    
GEORGE W. CANNON, JR.
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case: 1:08-cr-00005-RLF-GWC   Document #: 67   Filed: 09/12/08   Page 3 of 3