02-02-22 - Consent MOTION to Continue and Exclude Time Under Speedy Trial Act by USA as to JOHN EARLE SULLIVAN.txt

1 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA   :  
      : 
 v.     : Criminal No. 1:21- cr-00078- EGS  
      :  
JOHN EARLE SULLIVAN,   :  
      :  
   Defendant.   :   
UNITED STATES ’ CONSE NT MOTION TO CONTINUE AND  
TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT  
 
The parties are currently scheduled for a status hearing on March 4 , 2022 .  The United 
States  of America , with the consent of counsel for the defendant, John Sullivan, hereby move s this 
Court for a n approximately 45- day continuance of that hearing, and further to exclude the time 
within which  the trial must commence  under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq..  In 
support of this consent  motion, the undersigned state s as follows:   
1. The parties last conven ed for a status hearing on January  4, 2022.  On January 18, 
2022, and February 3, 2022, the government made additional discovery productions  to 
counsel for the defendant.  The materials include d indexes shared via filesharing of 
documents produced to Relativity.  The production to Relativity  included numerous 
audio files and other records of the U.S. Capitol Police, tens of thousands of tips and 
related documentation made to the Metropolitan Police Department tipline, and FBI reports of interviews, among other materials.  On February 10, 2022, the undersigned 
also filed a memorandum on the docket summarizing the status of global discovery in 
Capitol Breach matters for the Court.   
2. Counsel for defendant s recently obtained access to the FPD Relativity workspace .  As 
noted, m any of the materials previously produced via filesharing, including those in the 
production described in paragraph 1, are currently available to search, review, and Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS   Document 69   Filed 03/02/22   Page 1 of 42 
 download as necessary in the database; keyword searches, for instance, may be 
performed.   
3. Counsel for the defendant anticipates being in a homicide trial commencing this week 
in D.C. Superior Court. 
4. Counsel for the government anticipates being in an approximately two- week trial in 
this Court beginning on March 10, 2022.   
5. The undersigned anticipates the continued production of additional discovery to t he 
defendant, including defendant -specific materials , in the near future .  Given counsel 
for the  defendant’s interest in reviewing the voluminous discovery materials, including 
the most recent productions  on the Relativity workspace, and the government’s 
continued production of discovery materials  to defense counsel , the parti es seek an 
additional continuance of approximately 45 days or another date thereafter at the 
Court’s convenience .  The additional time will afford the parties time to continue to 
produce and review discovery.  
6. The need for reasonable time to address discovery obligations is among multiple pretrial preparation grounds that Courts of Appeals, including our Circuit, have routinely held sufficient to grant continuances and exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act – and in cases involving far less complexity in te ’rms of the volume and 
nature of data, and the number of defendants entitled to discoverable materials.  See, 
e.g., United States v. Bikundi , 926 F.3d 761, 777- 78 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (upholding 
ends-of-justice continuances totaling 18 months in two co- defendant health care f raud 
and money laundering conspiracy case, in part because the District Court found a need to “permit defense counsel and the government time to both produce discovery Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS   Document 69   Filed 03/02/22   Page 2 of 43 
 and review discovery” ); United States v. Gordon, 710 F.3d 1124, 1157- 58 (10th Cir. 
2013)  (upholding ends -of-justice continuance of ten months and twenty- four days in 
case involving violation of federal securities laws, where discovery included 
“documents detailing the hundreds of financial transactions that formed the basis for the charges” and “hundreds and thousands of documents that needs to be catalogued and separated, so that the parties could identify the relevant ones”) (internal quotation marks omitted); United States v. O’Connor , 656 F.3d 630, 640 (7th Cir. 2011) 
(upholding ends -of-justice continuances totaling five months and 20 days in wire 
fraud case that began with eight charged defendants and ended with a single defendant exercising the right to trial, based on “the complexity of the case, the magnitude of the discovery, and the a ttorneys’ schedules”) . 
WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this Court grant the motion for a n 
approximately 45- day continuance of the above -captioned proceeding, and tha t the Court exclude 
the time within which the trial must commence under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq., on the basis  that the ends of justice served by taking such actions  outweigh the best interest 
of the public and the defendant in a spee dy trial  pursuant to the factors described in 18 U.S.C. § 
3161(h)(7)(A), (B) (i), (ii), a nd (iv) , and failure to grant such a continuance would result in a  
  Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS   Document 69   Filed 03/02/22   Page 3 of 44 
 miscarriage of justice .   
Respectfully submitted,  
       MATTHEW M. GRAVES  
United States Attorney  
D.C. Bar Number 481052 
 
By: /s/ Candice C. Wong 
Candice C. Wong  
       D.C. Bar No. 990903  
Assistant United States Attorney  
555 4th Street, N.W., R oom 4816 
Washington, D.C. 20530 
(202) 252- 7849  
candice.wong@usdoj.gov 
 
 Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS   Document 69   Filed 03/02/22   Page 4 of 4