DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
SHALICA BAXTER, 
Defendant. 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
 
) 
Criminal No. 2017-24 
) 
) 
)  
) 
) 
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
Jocelyn Hewlett, Acting United States Attorney 
Everard E. Potter, AUSA 
United States Attorney’s Office 
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 
 
For the United States of America, 
 
Omodare Jupiter, FPD 
Brendan A. Hurson, AFPD 
Office of the Federal Public Defender  
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 
 
For Shalica Baxter. 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
GÓMEZ, J. 
 
Before the Court is the application of Shalica Baxter 
(“Baxter”) to waive her speedy trial. For the reasons stated 
herein, the time to try this case is extended up to and 
including January 20, 2019.   
Case: 3:17-cr-00024-RAM-RM   Document #: 44   Filed: 07/21/17   Page 1 of 3
United States v. Baxter 
Criminal No. 2017-24 
Order 
Page 2 
 
 
While the Speedy Trial Act requires that defendants be 
tried within seventy days of indictment, the Court specifically 
finds that extending this period would be in the best interest 
of justice for several reasons. First, an extension is necessary 
to allow Baxter to complete a pretrial diversion program that, 
if successfully completed, will result in dismissal of her 
charges. Second, Baxter made her request with the advice and 
consent of counsel. Third, without an extension, Baxter would be 
denied reasonable time necessary to explore plea options and 
prepare for trial.   
 
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); 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 if the] case [i]s not 
‘complex.’"); see also United States v. Lattany, 982 F.2d 866, 
883 (3d Cir. 1992) ("[T]he district court did not abuse its 
discretion when it delayed the trial to give counsel . . . 
opportunity to . . . decid[e] upon and prepar[e] an appropriate 
defense."); United States v. Brooks, 697 F.2d 517, 522 (3d Cir. 
Case: 3:17-cr-00024-RAM-RM   Document #: 44   Filed: 07/21/17   Page 2 of 3
United States v. Baxter 
Criminal No. 2017-24 
Order 
Page 3 
 
1982) (holding there was no abuse of discretion where district 
court found that  multiple count, multiple defendant "case was 
complex and required additional time for adequate 
preparation."). 
 
The premises considered; it is hereby   
 
 
ORDERED that the time beginning from the date of this order 
granting an extension through January 20, 2019, shall be 
excluded in computing the time within which the trial for 
Shalica Baxter must be initiated pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161.  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
S\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
Curtis V. Gómez 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
District Judge 
 
 
 
Case: 3:17-cr-00024-RAM-RM   Document #: 44   Filed: 07/21/17   Page 3 of 3