DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
JEVON STRIDIRON, 
Defendant. 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
 
) 
Criminal No. 2014-13 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
Ronald Sharpe, United States Attorney 
Everard Potter, AUSA 
United States Attorney’s Office 
St. Thomas, VI 
 
For the plaintiff United States of America, 
 
Omodare Jupiter, Federal Public Defender 
Gabriel Villegas, AFPD 
Office of the Federal Public Defender 
St. Thomas, VI 
 
For defendant Jevon Stridiron. 
 
 
ORDER 
GÓMEZ, J. 
 
For the reasons stated herein, the time to try this case is 
extended up to and including July 7, 2014.   
Since this case was indicted, the parties have agreed that 
pretrial diversion is appropriate in this matter.  While the 
Speedy Trial Act requires that a defendant be tried within 
seventy days of indictment, the Court specifically finds that 
extending this period would be in the best interest of justice 
Case: 3:14-cr-00013-CVG-RM   Document #: 20   Filed: 04/04/14   Page 1 of 3
United States v. Stridiron 
Criminal No. 2014-13 
Order 
Page 2 
 
for several reasons.  First, an extension is necessary to allow 
the defendant to complete pretrial diversion.  Second, the 
defendant made this request with the advice and consent of 
counsel and with the express understanding that his waiver is 
not predicated upon any promises, agreements, or understandings 
of any kind between the government and the defense that would 
preclude the government from proceeding against the defendant 
during or after the time period covered by his waiver.  Third, 
without an extension of time the Government will not be able to 
determine the defendant’s success in the pretrial diversion 
program.   
Consistent with these concerns, the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Third Circuit has recognized that "whether or 
not a case is 'unusual' or 'complex,' an ends of justice 
continuance may in appropriate circumstances be granted."  
United States v. Fields, 39 F.3d 439, 444 (3d Cir. 1994)(citing 
United States v. Dota, 33 F.3d 1179(9th Cir. 1994)("An ends of 
justice continuance may be justified on grounds that one side 
needs more time to prepare for trial...even though a case is not 
complex")); see also United States v. Brooks, 697 F.2d 517, 522 
(3d Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1071 (1983) (no abuse of 
discretion where district court found that  multiple count, 
multiple defendant "case was complex and required additional 
Case: 3:14-cr-00013-CVG-RM   Document #: 20   Filed: 04/04/14   Page 2 of 3
United States v. Stridiron 
Criminal No. 2014-13 
Order 
Page 3 
 
time for adequate preparation."); United States v. Lattany, 982 
F.2d 866, 883 (3d Cir. 1992) ("district court did not abuse its 
discretion [by delaying trial] to give counsel ... opportunity 
to...decid[e] upon and prepar[e] an appropriate defense.") 
 
Accordingly, the time beginning from the date of this order 
granting an extension through July 7, 2014, shall be excluded in 
computing the time within which a trial must be initiated 
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161. 
 
 
 
  
 
 
S\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
Curtis V. Gómez 
 
District Judge 
Case: 3:14-cr-00013-CVG-RM   Document #: 20   Filed: 04/04/14   Page 3 of 3