USA v. Estes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
v. 	) 	No. 3:25-CR-119-KAC-DCP
)
JASON ESTES, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
All pretrial motions in this case have been referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b) for disposition or recommendation as appropriate. This case is before the Court on
Defendant Jason Estes’s Motion to Continue Trial and Enlarge Relevant Deadlines [Doc. 19],
which was filed on June 17, 2026.
Defendant asks the Court to continue the July 28, 2026 trial date, and all related deadlines
[Id. at 1]. In support of his motion, Defendant states that discovery in this matter consists of
multiple terabytes of data that includes thousands of pages of detailed, financial information. [Id.
¶ 1]. Defendant’s counsel has engaged an electronic discovery service, but the process in working
with the service has taken longer than expected and necessitates additional time to review
discovery [Id.]. Defendant is aware of his right to a speedy trial and does not oppose a continuance
of his trial date and the relevant deadlines in this case [Id. ¶ 2]. The Government does not object
to the requested relief [Id. ¶ 4].
Based upon the information in Defendant’s motion and because the Government does not
oppose the continuance, the Court finds the ends of justice served by granting a continuance
outweigh 	the 	interests 	of 	Defendant 	and 	the 	public 	in 	a 	speedy 	trial. 	See 	18 	U.S.C.
Case 3:25-cr-00119-KAC-DCP Document 20 Filed 07/09/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID
#: <pageID>

2
§ 3161(h)(7)(A). In making this determination, the Court has considered the factors set forth in
18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B). Specifically, the Court concludes that failing to grant a continuance
would both result in a miscarriage of justice and deny counsel for Defendant the reasonable time
necessary for effective preparation, even accounting for the exercise of due diligence. See id.
§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), (iv). Defendant needs more time to review discovery, and otherwise prepare
for trial. The Court finds that all of this cannot occur before the July 28, 2026 trial date.
The Court therefore GRANTS Defendant Jason Estes’s Motion to Continue Trial and
Enlarge Relevant Deadlines [Doc. 19]. The trial of this case is reset to December 8, 2026. A new
schedule is included below. Because the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a
continuance outweigh the interests of Defendant and the public in a speedy trial, all time between
the filing of the motions on June 17, 2026, and the new trial date is fully excludable time under
the Speedy Trial Act. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D), (h)(1)(H), (h)(7)(A)–(B).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:
(1) 	Defendant Jason Estes’s Motion to Continue Trial and Enlarge
Relevant Deadlines [Doc. 19] is GRANTED;
(2) 	the trial of this matter is reset to commence on December 8, 2026,
at 9:00 a.m., before the Honorable Katherine A. Crytzer, United
States District Judge;
(3) 	all time between the filing of the motions on June 17, 2026, and the
new trial date of December 8, 2026, is fully excludable time under
the Speedy Trial Act for the reasons set forth herein;
(4) 	the deadline for filing a plea agreement in the record and providing
reciprocal discovery is November 6, 2026;
(5) 	the deadline for filing motions in limine is November 23, 2026, and
responses to motions in limine are due on or before December 1,
2026;
(6) 	the parties are to appear before the undersigned for a final pretrial
conference on November 19, 2026, at 11:30 a.m.; and
Case 3:25-cr-00119-KAC-DCP Document 20 Filed 07/09/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID
#: <pageID>

3
(7) 	requests for special jury instructions with appropriate citations to
authority pursuant to Local Rule 7.4 shall be filed on or before
November 30, 2026.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
ENTER:
_____________________________
Debra C. Poplin
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:25-cr-00119-KAC-DCP Document 20 Filed 07/09/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID
#: <pageID>